Appeal No. 2005-0289 Page 15
Application No. 09/491,841
and 13 as noted, supra. Accordingly, the rejection of claims 23
and 26 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed.
We turn next o the rejection of claim 30 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ellinwood in view of
Tinnerman. We cannot sustain the rejection of claim 30 because
the examiner has not shown that Tinnerman makes up for the basic
deficiencies of Ellinwood. Accordingly, the rejection of claim
30 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
1, 3, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 16-18, 20, 22-26, 29, 20 and 39 under 35
U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, is reversed. The decision of the
examiner to reject claims 1, 3, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 16-18, 20, 22,
24, 25, 29 and 39 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) is reversed. The
decision of the examiner to reject claims 23, 26 and 30 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007