Appeal No. 2000-0875 Page 5
Application No. 08/945,138
would not have been suggestive of the claimed invention, we
cannot sustain the examiner's rejections of claims 10 and 14
to 18.
REMAND
We remand the application to the examiner to consider on
the record whether or not claims 10 and 14 to 18 are
patentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the combined teachings
of the admitted prior art shown in Figure 2 (note footnote 2),
Okakda and Phalin.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 10 and 14 to 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed. In
addition, the application has been remanded to the examiner
for further action.
This application, by virtue of its "special" status,
requires immediate action, see MPEP § 708.01 (Seventh Edition,
Rev. 1, Feb. 2000).
REVERSED and REMANDED
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007