Ex parte WEBB - Page 9




          Appeal No. 1997-1232                                                        
          Application No. 08/182,035                                                  


               In view of the above, it is our opinion that, since all                
          of the claimed limitations are not taught or suggested in the               
          prior art of record, the Examiner has not established a prima               
          facie case of anticipation.  Accordingly, we do not sustain                 
          the                                                                         
          35 U.S.C.  102 rejections of claims 1, 2, and 23.                          
               In summary, we have not sustained either of the                        
          Examiner’s rejections of the claims on appeal.  Therefore, the              
          decision of the Examiner rejecting claims 1, 2, and 23 is                   
          reversed.                                                                   
                                      REVERSED                                        
                                                                                     
                                                       )                              
                                                       )                              
                                                       )                              
                         JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO            )  BOARD OF PATENT             
                         Administrative Patent Judge   )                              
                                                       )   APPEALS AND                
          )                                                                           
                                                       )  INTERFERENCES               
                                                       )                              
                         STUART N. HECKER              )                              
                         Administrative Patent Judge   )                              

          FLEMING, Administrative Patent Judge, Dissenting-in-Part:                   
               While I agree that the rejection of claims 2 and 23 under              
          35 U.S.C.  102 should be reversed for the reasons set forth                
                                          9                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007