Appeal No. 1999-2544 Page 18
Application No. 08/796,513
electrical heating means and, thus, it does not appear to us
that the suggested combination of these prior art references,
as proposed by the examiner, would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the relevant art having the references
before him.
Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's
rejection of claims 1 and 12 as obvious over Jackson in view
of Zwaan or Lambert.
---Claims 2, 4, 6, 8 through 11, 13 through 15 and 17---
The rejection of claims 2, 4, 6, 8 through 11 and 13,
which are dependent on claim 1, and the rejection of claims
14, 15 and 17 which are dependent on claim 12, will not be
sustained for the same reasons as with respect to claims 1 and
12.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 3 and 16
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007