Appeal No. 2004-1089
Application No. 09/770,302
Hence, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
rejection of independent claim 29, and dependent claims 30
through 32 and 35 through 40, as being unpatentable over
Hagelfeldt in view of Metzler.
III. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 33 and 34 as
being unpatentable over Hagelfeldt in view of Metzler and Bertram
As Bertram does not cure the above noted shortcomings of the
Hagelfeldt and Metzler combination relative to the subject matter
recited in parent claim 29, we shall not sustain the standing 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of dependent claims 33 and 34 as being
unpatentable over Hagelfeldt in view of Metzler and Bertram.
SUMMARY
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 21 through 40
is affirmed with respect to claims 21 through 28 and reversed
with respect to claims 29 through 40.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007