Appeal No. 1998-1937
Application No. 08/518,509
As to the standing § 103 rejection of claim 5, the
tertiary Ferris reference additionally applied in this
rejection does not render obvious what we have found to be
lacking in the combined teachings of Carson and Holmes.
Accordingly, we also shall not sustain the examiner’s
rejection of claim 5.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
)
IAN A. CALVERT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
LAWRENCE J. STAAB )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
JEFFREY V. NASE )
Administrative Patent Judge )
LJS:hh
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007