Ex parte PHILLIPS - Page 7




          Appeal No. 1999-0242                                                        
          Application 08/643,829                                                      


               In addition to not disclosing a prosthesis meeting the                 
          flat mating surface limitations in claim 28, Sackett would not              
          have suggested same to one of ordinary skill in the art.                    
          Therefore, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.                     
          103(a) rejection of                                                         
















          claim 29, which depends from claim 28, as being unpatentable                
          over Sackett.                                                               
               The decision of the examiner is reversed.                              


                                     REVERSED                                         





                                          7                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007