Appeal No. 1999-0739
Application 08/747,663
We have additionally reviewed the patent to Nack
applied along with Curtis by the examiner against dependent
claims 7 and 18. However, we find nothing in this patent
which would change our view as expressed above, i.e., nothing
which would supply that which we have indicated above to be
lacking in Curtis. Thus, the examiner’s rejection of claims 7
and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 will also not be sustained.
In view of the foregoing, the examiner's decision
rejecting claims 1 through 18 of the present application under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
CHARLES E. FRANKFORT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF
PATENT
LAWRENCE J. STAAB ) APPEALS AND
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007