Appeal No. 1998-0234
Application No. 08,406,752
Since we have determined that the examiner has failed to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to the
claimed subject matter before us on appeal, we find it
unnecessary to comment on appellant's evidence of secondary
considerations relating to commercial success, long felt need
and copying by others.
To summarize our decision, we note that 1) the examiner's
rejection of claims 38 through 41, 43 and 60 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, has not been sustained, 2) the
examiner's rejection of claims 1 through 3, 6, 8, 9, 12
through 16, 28 through 30, 38 through 54 and 56 through 60
under § 103 as being unpatentable over Boggess in view of
Kornelson has not been sustained; 3)the examiner's rejection
of claims 18, 44 through 53 and 56 through 60 under § 103 as
being unpatentable over Boggess in view of Kornelson and
Slavsky has not been sustained; and 4) the examiner's
rejection of claim 55 under § 103 as being unpatentable over
Boggess in view of Kornelson and Potter (the German Patent)
has not been sustained.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007