Appeal No. 2002-1216
Application No. 09/034,466
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1, 4, 6 and 9 under
35 U.S.C. § 102 over Budde cannot be sustained.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 5, we note
the Examiner’s failure to provide any teachings or suggestions
for modification to overcome the deficiencies of Budde discussed
above. Based on our determination that Budde does not teach the
invention of base claims 1 and 6, the rejection of their
dependent claims based on modifying Budde cannot be proper.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the § 103 rejection of claims 2,
5, 7, 10 and 11 over Budde.
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007