Appeal No. 1998-0080
Application No. 08/177,763
argued by appellants, however, even the improper modification
of the admitted prior art by the teachings of Schmidt would
not result in the invention of claim 1.
In summary, we do not sustain the examiner’s rejection
of claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the admitted
prior art and Schmidt. Therefore, the decision of the
examiner rejecting claims 1-7 is reversed.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007