Appeal No. 1999-1252
Application No. 08/648,520
unpatentable over Suggitt is sustained because these claims do
not exclude the chlorination/demetallization step of Suggitt.
Finally, none of the other section 103 rejections on this
appeal can be sustained because the reference evidence adduced
by the examiner fails to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness with respect to the subject matter defined by the
rejected claims.
The decision of the examiner is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
Bradley R. Garris )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
Charles F. Warren ) BOARD OF
PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007