Appeal No. 1997-3528
Application No. 08/230,659
depend from claim 11, it follows that the subject matter of
these dependent claims would also not have been obvious over
the applied prior art references. Fine, 837 F.2d at 1076, 5
USPQ2d at 1600.
For the reasons set forth above and in the appeal brief
and reply briefs, we reverse (1) the rejection of claims 11,
13, 14, and 17 through 20 under the first paragraph of 35
U.S.C. § 112, (2) the rejection of claims 11, 12, 14, and 17
through 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Ducharme
in view of Bjorklund, and (3) the rejection of claims 11, 12,
14, and 17 through 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable
over Bjorklund in view of Walsh.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
CHUNG K. PAK )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
TERRY J. OWENS ) APPEALS
14
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007