Appeal No. 1997-4392
Application No. 08/639,515
We have additionally reviewed the patent to Shimizu, but find nothing in this reference which
provides a teaching to overcome the deficiencies we have noted above in the basic combination of
Altman and Eschenbach. Accordingly, we cannot sustain the examiner’s rejection of dependent claims
14 and 16, which depend from claim 12.
In light of the forgoing, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 12-16 under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) is reversed.
REVERSED
CHARLES E. FRANKFORT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JEFFREY V. NASE ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007