Appeal No. 2000-1959
Application No. 09/032,928
specific diffraction grating in the original coding? We agree with appellant's argument
that the examiner's combination and modification of the teachings of Horst is based
upon improper hindsight reconstruction of appellant's claimed invention, and we will not
sustain the rejection of independent claims 1 and 3 and dependent claim 2.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
PARSHOTAM S. LALL )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOSEPH L. DIXON ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
ANITA PELLMAN GROSS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
JD/RWK
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007