Appeal No. 2000-1914
Application No. 08/718,643
information. However, appellants request reconsideration of
the refusal to consider the declaration and also point out
that an amendment accompanies the appeal brief providing an
updated sales report and a declaration (Raymond Iannetta).
The examiner should address the noted request and amendment,
each of which were not mentioned in the answer.
As a final point, we note that should the examiner reject
claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, with evidence of nonobviousness
(secondary considerations) entered into the application, the
examiner must assess the evidence of obviousness with the
evidence of nonobviousness; See In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468,
1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
In summary, this panel of the board has:
reversed the rejection of claims 1 through 7, 11 through
16, 19, 21, 22, 27, 31, 32, 34 through 36, 40, 48, 49, and 55
through 57 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Deyoreo;
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007