Appeal No. 98-1428
Application No. 08/590,388
With regard to the examiner's rejection of method claims
10 through 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on Metcalf and
Meroney as combined above, and further in view of Cote, we
share appellant’s view as expressed on pages 9-11 of the brief
and in the reply brief, that the examiner’s proposed
combination of these patents is completely unsupported by the
teachings of the references themselves and is based on
impermissible hindsight derived solely from appellant’s own
teachings and disclosure. For that reason, the examiner’s
rejection of claims 10 through 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 will
likewise not be sustained.
As is apparent from the foregoing, the decision of the
examiner rejecting claims 1 through 13 of the present
application is reversed.
Pursuant to our authority under 37 CFR § 1.196(b), we
enter the following new ground of rejection against
appellant’s claims 1, 2 and 5 through 9 on appeal.
Claims 1, 2 and 5 through 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007