Interference No. 104,649 Page No. 23 B. Zhou Preliminary Motion I Fails to Demonstrate that Keagy's Corresponding Claims are Anticipated or Rendered Obvious by the Prior Art Zhou Preliminary Motion 1 requests judgment that Keagy's corresponding claims be held unpatentable as either being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102 or rendered unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103, in view of the prior art. (Zhou Preliminary Motion 1, Paper No. 24, p. 1). In particular, Zhou argues that Chen et al., U.S. Patent No. 5,448,649 ("Chen '649") anticipates Keagy's corresponding claims. Additionally, Zhou argues that Keagy's corresponding claims are obvious over Sibbald, U.S. Patent No. 5,619,586 ("Sibbald '586") in view of Cobb, Jr., U.S. Patent No. 4,906,070 ("Cobb '070") as well as Elmes et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,455,083 ("Elmes '083") and Usui et al., U.S. Patent No. 5,210,796 ("Usui '796"). These grounds of rejection are discussed below. I . Chen '649 Is Not "Prior Art" to Keagy's Corresponding Claims As noted by Zhou, Keagy's involved '744 application was filed as a continuation of its earlier '418 application, which itself is a continuation of Keagy's earlier '098 application filed on September 16, 1994. (Paper No. 24, p. 2, 111-2). Chen '649 issued from an application filed on May 24, 1994. (ZX 2008, front page). Accordingly, on its face, Chen '649 is available as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e). During the prosecution of Keagy's '098 application, the examiner rejected some of Keagy's pending claims as obvious over Chen '649. (ZX 2004, Office Action of 11/29/95, p. 9). In response to the rejection over Chen, Keagy filed several declarations under 37 CFR § 1. 131 in an effort to overcome the Chen reference. According to Zhou, however, these declarations arePage: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007