Appeal No. 2003-1020 Page 7
Application No. 08/859,051
U.S.C. § 103.3
OTHER ISSUES
Upon return of this case to the examining group, we would recommend that
appellants and the examiner review claims 116 and 122 for clarity. It appears that
appellants’ argument that “the claim[s] as [presently] worded [do] not make sense” is
well founded.
REVERSED
)
Sherman D. Winters )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
)
Hubert C. Lorin ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge )
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
Toni R. Scheiner )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Morrison & Foerster LLP
3811 Valley Centre Drive
Suite 500
3 Having found that the examiner has not established a prima facie case of
obviousness for the claims on appeal, we find it unnecessary to comment on the
declarations executed June 28, 2000 and May 13, 2002.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007