Appeal No. 2002-0128
Application No. 08/878,588
support the asserted conclusion. See In re Lee, 277 F.3d 1338,
1343, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1433-34 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
Since all of the claim limitations are not taught or
suggested by the applied prior art, it is our opinion that the
Examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness
with respect to the claims on appeal. Accordingly, we do not
sustain the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of
independent claims 1 and 17, nor of claims 2-6 and 18-22
dependent thereon. Therefore, the Examiner’s decision rejecting
claims 1-6 and 17-22 is reversed.
REVERSED
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
LANCE LEONARD BARRY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
JFR:hh
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007