Ex parte FREDLUND et al. - Page 3




                 Appeal No. 2001-0052                                                                                                                   
                 Application No. 09/229,216                                                                                                             


                 directed to non-statutory subject matter, viz., printed                                                                                
                 matter.                                                                                                                                




                          Claim 2 stands further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as                                                                     
                 anticipated by English.                   1                                                                                            
                          Claim 2 stands even further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103                                                                      
                 as unpatentable over either one of Morisawa or Schmidt in view                                                                         
                 of “Kodak Fun Saver 35”.                                                                                                               
                          A previous rejection of claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 112,                                                                          
                 second paragraph, has been explicitly withdrawn by the                                                                                 
                 examiner in the answer (page 3).                                                                                                       
                          Reference is made to the brief and answer for the                                                                             
                 respective positions of appellants and the examiner.                                                                                   


                                                                     OPINION                                                                            


                          We REVERSE.                                                                                                                   


                          1Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) based on either Blinow                                                                     
                 or Van Allen have apparently been withdrawn since they have                                                                            
                 not been repeated in the answer.                                                                                                       
                                                                          3–                                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007