Appeal No. 97-0391
Application 08/443,044
the absence of a prima facie rejection, the offered
obviousness rejection of claim 11 and hence claim 12 is not
sustained. In summary, we have affirmed the Examiner’s
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 of claims 1, 4, 7 and 10 as
anticipated by Zinkann, claims 1, 2, 4, 7 and 10 as
anticipated by Malik. We have also sustained the rejection
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 3 and 5 as being obvious over
Malik in view of Durst. However, we have not sustained the
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 11 and 12 as being
obvious over Malik in view of Durst and Doyle.
Accordingly, the decision of the Examiner is affirmed in
part.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007