Appeal No. 1997-1522
Application 08/296,779
appellants. See In re Gal, 980 F.2d 717, 719, 25 USPQ2d 1076, 1078
(Fed. Cir. 1992) (finding of “obvious design choice” is precluded where claimed structure
and the function it performs are different from the prior art.)
In view of our reversal of this rejection, we do not find it necessary to discuss the
separate rejection of dependent claim 2 over King in view of Optics and further in view of
Mayer especially since Mayer, who teaches the application of an aluminum oxide layer on
the surface of gem as a hard protective layer, does not overcome the deficiencies of King
and Optics.
Reversed
MARY F. DOWNEY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
WILLIAM F. SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
ANDREW H. METZ )
Administrative Patent Judge )
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007