Appeal No. 1999-0462
Application 08/440,291
Ross et al. (Ross) 4,526,718 Jul. 2, 1985
The Issue
The issue presented for review is whether the examiner erred in rejecting claims 8,
10 through 16, 18, and 24 through 31 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the
combined disclosures of Holton and Ross.
Deliberations
Our deliberations in this matter have included evaluation and review of the following
materials: (1) the instant specification, including all of the claims on appeal; (2) applicants’
Appeal Brief; (3) the Examiner’s Answer; and (4) the above-cited prior art references.
On consideration of the record, including the above-listed materials, we reverse the
examiner’s rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Discussion
Initially, we agree with appellants that the reaction described by Ross in column
12, lines 27 through 54, bears little relationship to the instantly claimed method (Appeal
Brief, page 11). In our judgment, Ross is singularly unhelpful in resolving the question of
obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and we shall not refer to this reference further.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007