Appeal No. 1998-0224
Application No. 08/291,564
Since all of the claim limitations are not taught or
suggested by the applied prior art, it is our opinion that the
Examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness
with respect to the claims on appeal. Accordingly, we do not
sustain the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of
independent claims 18 and 25, nor of claims 19-24 and 26
dependent thereon. Therefore, the Examiner’s decision
rejecting claims 18-26 is reversed.
REVERSED
)
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO )
Administrative Patent Judge )
JFR:hh
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007