Appeal No. 2003-0730
Application No. 09/323,650
appellants, neither Rose nor Milstein offers any suggestion that
the disclosed emitters can be effectively used as an optical
temperature sensor. In addition, the examiner has not
established that the uses disclosed by Rose and Milstein would
have been understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to
correlate to use as an optical temperature sensor.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
decision rejecting the appealed claims is affirmed-in-part.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
)
PETER F. KRATZ ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JAMES T. MOORE )
Administrative Patent Judge )
ECK:clm
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007