Appeal No. 1999-2064 Page 15
Application No. 08/619,853
the examiner's treatment of the Kendrick Declaration was
appropriate.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claims 29 to 48 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
affirmed with respect to claims 29, 37 and 39 and reversed
with respect to claims 30 to 36, 38 and 40 to 48.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 29 to 48 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed with respect
to claims 29, 37 and 39 and reversed with respect to claims 30
to 36, 38 and 40 to 48. In addition, the application has been
remanded to the examiner to determine whether or not the
Kendrick Declaration is sufficient to overcome Mowry and if
not, whether claims 30 to 36, 38 and 40 to 48 are patentable
under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In addition to affirming the examiner's rejection of one
or more claims, this decision contains a remand. 37 CFR
§ 1.196(e) provides that
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007