Appeal No. 2005-0440
Application No. 09/994,075
unpatentable over WO ’308 in view of Eckert or Evans and further
in view of Tsukamoto; (iii) claim 9 as unpatentable over WO ’308
in view of Eckert or Evans and further in view of Nye or EP
’687; (iv) claim 12 as unpatentable over WO ’308 in view of
Eckert or Evans and further in view of the appellants’ admitted
prior art; (v) claims 1 through 8, 10, and 20 through 25 as
unpatentable over Hovey in view of Tsukamoto; (vi) claim 9 as
unpatentable over Hovey in view of Tsukamoto and further in view
of Nye or EP ’687; and (vii) claim 12 as unpatentable over Hovey
in view of Tsukamoto and further in view of the appellants’
admitted prior art.
The decision of the examiner is affirmed.
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007