Appeal No. 2002-1267 Page 6
Application No. 09/333,928
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claim 1,
and claims 2 to 6, 8, 9 and 18 to 21 dependent thereon, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Spada in view of Focke is reversed.
We have also reviewed the reference to Adams additionally applied in the
rejection of claims 7 and 10 to 17 (dependent on claim 1) but find nothing therein which
makes up for the deficiencies of Spada and Focke discussed above regarding claim 1.
Accordingly, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 7 and 10 to 17 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Spada in view of Focke as applied to claim
1, and further in view of Adams is also reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007