Appeal No. 1997-0230
Application No. 08/416,668
claim 1 also apply to claim 8, and the examiner does not explain
how Bennett remedies the deficiencies. Accordingly, we reverse
the rejection of claim 8 and claims 9-13 which depend, directly
or indirectly, therefrom.
DECISION
The rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 1-7 over
appellants’ admitted prior art in view of Yount, and claims 8-13
over appellants’ admitted prior art in view of Yount and
Bennett, are reversed.
REVERSED
CHUNG K. PAK )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
TERRY J. OWENS ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
THOMAS A. WALTZ )
Administrative Patent Judge )
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007