Appeal No. 2001-1309
Application No. 08/964,780
To whatever extent Onodera suggests employing a motor to adjust a seat in an
automobile, Onodera clearly does not provide for the deficiencies noted supra with
regard to the claimed motor speed sequence, which each of dependent claims 12 and
14 includes. Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 12 and 14 under 35
U.S.C. § 103.
The examiner’s decision rejecting claims 5-7 and 11-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
reversed.
REVERSED
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JERRY SMITH ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JOSEPH L. DIXON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
eak/vsh
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007