Appeal No. 2003-0485
Application 08/767,249
Given our above-noted determination regarding the
shortcomings of Fabel, and the lack of any further teaching or
suggestion in either Frease or Linden supplying such
deficiencies, it follows that the examiner’s rejections of
dependent claims 20 through 22, 24 and 25 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Fabel in view of Linden, of
claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on Fabel and Frease, and
the rejection of claim 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on
Fabel, Linden and Frease, also will not be sustained.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007