Ex Parte LAUTERJUNG - Page 8





                 Appeal No. 2003-1502                                                                                 Page 8                     
                 Application No. 09/365,860                                                                                                      



                                                               CONCLUSION                                                                        

                         None of the rejections are sustained.5                                                                                  

                         The decision of the examiner is reversed.                                                                               



                                                                REVERSED                                                                         






                                          NEAL E. ABRAMS                                     )                                                   
                                          Administrative Patent Judge                        )                                                   
                                                                                             )                                                   
                                                                                             )                                                   
                                                                                             )                                                   
                                                                                             ) BOARD OF PATENT                                   
                                          CHARLES E. FRANKFORT                               )     APPEALS                                       
                                          Administrative Patent Judge                        )       AND                                         
                                                                                             )  INTERFERENCES                                    
                                                                                             )                                                   
                                                                                             )                                                   
                                                                                             )                                                   
                                          JEFFREY V. NASE                                    )                                                   
                                          Administrative Patent Judge                        )                                                   
                 NEA:pgg                                                                                                                         







                         5In view of this decision, it is not necessary for us to reach the issue of whether the invention as                    
                 claimed is supported by the disclosure in the priority documents, which was raised by the examiner on                           
                 page 6 of the Answer and responded to by the appellant on pages 10-13 of the Brief and pages 1 and 2 of                         
                 the Reply Brief.                                                                                                                








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007