Appeal No. 1997-3221
Application No. 08/249,241
as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the
time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Appeal No. 1999-0399: Reversed
We reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 2, 8-21, and 40 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Bettler ‘92 in view of Puckett.
AMPA Receptors:
Appeal No. 1997-3377: Reversed
We reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 31, 33, 34, and 37-40 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over Puckett in view of Cutting.
Appeal No. 1999-1393: Reversed
We reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
over Heinemann in view of Puckett and Sun.
Appeal No. 1999-2118: Reversed
We reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 22, 32, and 34-40 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Heinemann in view of Puckett and Sun.
We reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 31 and 33 under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Heinemann, Puckett, and Sun as applied to claims
22, 32, and 34-40 above and further in view of Cutting.
Appeal No. 1999-2200: Affirmed-in-Part, 37 CFR § 1.196(c)
125
Page: Previous 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007