Appeal No. 97-2119
Application No. 08/263,825
Appellants concede (Brief, page 8) that Fishman discloses
“a hopper and means for dispensing feed from the hopper.”
Although Fishman discloses a timer for controlling
the dispensing cycle of a hopper (Figure 1; column 2, lines 6
through 10; column 6, lines 39 through 43), we agree with
appellants that “none of the references relied upon by the
Examiner have anything to do with lunar transit time” (Brief,
page 9). Thus, the obviousness rejection of claims 8 through
14 is reversed.
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through
14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOHN C. MARTIN ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
STUART N. HECKER )
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007