Appeal No. 2000-1475 Page 11
Application No. 08/844,016
invention. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d
1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988) and In re Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013,
1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972).
We reverse the decision of the examiner to reject claims
5 to 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 since the examiner has not
presented evidence that would have led one of ordinary skill
in the art to arrive at the claimed invention for the reasons
set forth above in regard to the anticipation rejection.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 1 to 4 and 11 to 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007