Appeal No. 1997-3524 Page 22
Application No. 08/336,402
resins. See brief, page 25 and reply brief, page 7. With
respect to claim 10, the examiner has not shown where Pall
reasonably suggests a drying temperature of approximately 400
degrees centigrade as argued by appellants (brief, page 26).
Consequently, on this record, we will not sustain the examiner’s
§ 103 rejection of claims 8-13, 15-18 and 20.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the examiner to reject claim 25 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph as lacking descriptive support
in the original specification is affirmed. The decision of the
examiner to reject claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph as being indefinite for failing to particularly point
out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicants
regard as invention is reversed. The decision of the examiner to
reject claims 1 and 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated
by Pall is affirmed. The decision of the examiner to reject
claims 2 and 3 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Pall
is reversed. The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1, 2,
4-7, 14, 19 and 21-25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Pall is affirmed. The decision of the examiner to reject
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007