Ex parte WIDLUND et al. - Page 8




          Appeal No. 1999-2678                                                        
          Application 08/704,705                                                      


          and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole               
          would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to               
          a person having ordinary skill in the art.  Consequently, we                
          shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.  103(a) rejections                
          of claims 12 through 30.                                                    
               In summary, the decision of the examiner to reject claims              
          12 through 30 is affirmed with respect to claims 12 through                 
          23, 29 and 30, and reversed with respect to claims 24 through               
          28.                                                                         














               No time period for taking any subsequent action in                     
          connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR                    
           1.136(a).                                                                 


                                          8                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007