Appeal No. 1999-2844
Application No. 08/813,530
The examiner relies upon Bloch only for an additional
disclosure of the appellants’ component (2)(c)(3) (answer,
page 5), and not for a disclosure which remedies the
above-discussed deficiency in Gutierrez and Le Suer as to
component (2)(b).
The examiner, therefore, has not set forth a factual basis
which is sufficient to support a conclusion of prima facie
obviousness of the invention recited in any of the appellants’
claims. Accordingly, we reverse the examiner’s rejections.
DECISION
The rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 1-3, 6-8
and 11-18 over Gutierrez in combination with Le Suer, and
claims 1-18 over Gutierrez in combination with Le Suer and Bloch,
are reversed.
REVERSED
Terry J. Owens )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)BOARD OF PATENT
Thomas A. Waltz )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
Jeffrey T. Smith )
Administrative Patent Judge )
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007