Appeal No. 2002-2318
Application 09/652,520
Therefore, we will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of
any of the claims on appeal.
In summary, we have not sustained the examiner’s
rejection of the claims on appeal because: (1) Pirolli is
neither analogous art nor reasonably pertinent to the
problem appellants are trying to solve; (2) there is
insufficient motivation for one of ordinary skill in the art
to combine Pirolli with Pouschine; and (3) all limitations
recited in the independent claims would not be met even if
the combination were proper. Accordingly, the decision of
the examiner rejecting claims 1-18 is reversed.
REVERSED
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
JERRY SMITH ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP )
Administrative Patent Judge )
JS/eld
-10-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007