Appeal No. 2002-1486
Application 08/931,480
(Fed. Cir. 1995). For reasons discussed above, the examiner has not demonstrated that the
Elliott reference discloses each element or limitation of any rejected claim. Consequently, the
rejection of claims 1-32 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Elliott is without merit
and cannot be sustained.
Conclusion
The rejection of claims 1-32 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Elliott is
reversed.
REVERSED
JAMESON LEE )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
SALLY GARDNER LANE ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
SALLY C. MEDLEY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007