Appeal No. 1999-0930
Application 08/410,931
stem 9 is, itself, the reservoir R which extends, along with
its capillary striations, to the distal end of the stem, as
earlier explained. Thus, in our opinion, it would have taken
impermissible hindsight and specifically chosen prior art
features to alter the applicator device of Gueret to address
the content of appellant’s claims. It is for this reason that
the rejections are reversed.
In summary, this panel of the board has:
reversed the rejection of claims 1 through 3, 5, 6, and
12 through 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Gueret in view of Buehrer, Bell, and Kitamura; and
reversed the rejection of claims 7 through 11 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Gueret in view of
Buehrer, Bell, and Kitamura, and Yokosuka.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007