Appeal No. 1998-3015 Page 7
Application No. 08/790,373
4) that Conley's pleated sheet "may obviously be of woven or
non-woven fibers" was not part of the rejection before us in
this appeal. Moreover, we consider this statement to be a
finding of fact unsupported by the record and therefore
speculative. Such an unsupported, speculative finding does
not take the place of evidence and therefore is not well
taken.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claims 1, 4 and 8 to 11 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 is reversed.
Claims 5 and 7
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 5 and 7 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai in view of
Conley.
Claim 7 depends from independent claim 6. We have
reviewed the Conley reference additionally applied in the
rejection of claim 7 but find nothing therein which makes up
for the deficiencies of Sakai discussed above regarding claim
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007