Appeal No. 2004-1339 Page 9
Application No. 09/488,079
The obviousness rejection
We will not sustain the rejection of dependent claims 3, 4, 13, 14, 20, 21 and 23
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Dlugos since the examiner has not
presented any evidence as to why the subject matter of independent claims 1, 11, 18,
24, 27 and 28 would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person
of ordinary skill in the art.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007