Appeal No. 2004-1088 Page 9
Application No. 09/805,202
The obviousness rejection based on Gilmore, McWilliams and Weir
We have reviewed the reference to Weir additionally applied in the rejection of
claim 5 but find nothing therein which makes up for the deficiencies of Gilmore and
McWilliams discussed above regarding claim 1. Accordingly, we cannot sustain the
examiner's rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Gilmore in view of McWilliams and Weir.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 to 5, 10, 12 and 56
to 82 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
NEAL E. ABRAMS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JEFFREY V. NASE ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JENNIFER D. BAHR )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007