Appeal No. 1996-0605
Application 07/989,593
believes, after this reevaluation, that the claims on appeal are unpatentable, he
should issue an appropriate Office Action setting forth the rejection. In so doing,
we urge the examiner to use the model set forth in MPEP § 706.02(j) for any
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Adherence to this model will of necessity make
the examiner examine the claims on appeal on an individual basis, using the
correct legal standards.
SUMMARY
The rejection of claims 8, 11, 14 and 23-32 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Lichtenberger is reversed. The rejection of claims 8,
11, 14 and 23-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
the advertisement for ONDROX (UNIMED) in combination with Motoyama is
reversed.
REVERSED
Sherman D. Winters )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
Carol A. Spiegel )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
Donald E. Adams )
Administrative Patent Judge )
DA/dm
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007