Appeal No. 2003-0104 Page 11
Application No. 09/659,792
(4) Based upon the above-noted first determination, determine whether or not claims
11 to 13 would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person of
ordinary skill in the art from the combined teachings of Leslie and Hussain;
(5) Determine if the pocket of claim 7 is readable on storage pouch 36 of Pulli which
appears to have a closed bottom as shown in Figures 1, 2 and 7-9;
(6) Based upon determination (5), determine whether or not claims 7, 9 and 15 are
anticipated by Pulli; and
(7) If claim 7 is anticipated by Pulli, determine whether or not claims 8 and 10 would
have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person of ordinary skill in
the art from the combined teachings of Leslie, Hussain and Pulli.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 and 5 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is reversed; the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 9
and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) is reversed; and the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 3, 4, 6, 8 and 10 to 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed. In addition, we have
remanded the application to the examiner for further considerations.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007