Appeal No. 2000-0671 Application No. 08/909,507 the sockets, still exists. Similarly, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 6-8 and 10-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Jarwala in view of Chang because Chang does not provide for the deficiencies of Jarwala, noted supra with regard to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). The examiner’s decision is reversed. REVERSED KENNETH W. HAIRSTON ) Administrative Patent Judge ) ) ) ) ) BOARD OF PATENT ERROL A. KRASS ) APPEALS Administrative Patent Judge ) AND ) INTERFERENCES ) ) ) LANCE LEONARD BARRY ) Administrative Patent Judge ) eak/vsh 7Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007