Appeal No. 1999-2446 Page 30
Application No. 08/705,592
Claim 25
Claim 25 recites the same features as discussed
previously with respect to claims 10, 12 and 19 (i.e., the
mesh openings having a dimension of about ½ inch; the size of
the wood fragments being smaller than 1½ inch; and the wood
fragments being hammer milled wood fragments). As with claims
10, 12 and 19 above, the examiner has not provided any
evidence as to why it would have been obvious at the time the
invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the
art to have modified the wood fragments of Scott and the wire
mesh of Scott to have arrived at the claimed invention. Since
the examiner has not established that the subject matter of
claim 25 would have been obvious under
35 U.S.C. § 103, the decision of the examiner to reject claim
25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Scott is
reversed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 6, 7, 9 to 17 and 19 to 25 under the judicially created
Page: Previous 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007