Appeal No. 1997-3868 Page 10
Application No. 08/538,838
Gore & Associates v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220
USPQ 303, 312-13 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851
(1984); In re Rothermel, 276 F.2d 393, 396, 125 USPQ 328, 331
(CCPA 1960). Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner’s
§ 103 rejections of the appealed claims.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1, 3, 4, 7-
14 and 16-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Watkin in view of Bennett, Kasper or the prior art admission;
claims 5 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Watkin in view of Bennett, Kasper or the prior art
admission, and further in view of Nath; claim 15 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Watkin in view of
Bennett, Kasper or the prior art admission, and further in
view of Anagnostou; claims 2 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Watkin in view of Bennett, Kasper or
the prior art admission, and further in view of either Turner
or Staats; and claims 30 and 31 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Watkin in view of
either Bennett or the prior art admission is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007