Appeal No. 2001-0592
Application 09/110,824
Since we have determined that the teachings and
suggestions which would have been fairly derived from
Cherrington and Trinkle would not have made the subject matter
as a whole of claim 1 on appeal obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of appellant’s invention, we must
refuse to sustain the examiner’s rejection of that claim under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a). It follows that the examiner's rejection
of dependent claims 2 through 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based
on Cherrington and Trinkle will also not be sustained.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007