Appeal No. 2002-1192
Application 09/256,383
claims 4, 6, 10, 15 and 17 through 20 on appeal obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time of appellant’s invention,
we must refuse to sustain the examiner’s rejection of those
claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
We have also reviewed the patent to Jackson applied by the
examiner under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) against claims 5 and 9.
However, we find nothing in Jackson which would supply that which
we have indicated above to be lacking in the basic combination of
Lalvani and Lawman. Thus, the examiner’s additional rejection of
claims 5 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) will also not be
sustained.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007