Appeal No. 1999-0304
Application No. 08/520,606
sensor, the grounding element, the battery, and the fusible
link, and that arrangement is not taught or suggested by
Caiati and Iwata. The only possible explanation for the
combination clearly involves impermissible hindsight. Thus,
the examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness. Consequently, we cannot sustain the obviousness
rejection of claims 1 through 20.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through
20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
LEE E. BARRETT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOSEPH L. DIXON ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
ANITA PELLMAN GROSS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007