Appeal No. 2005-1247
Application No. 09/963,423 Page 12
CONCLUSION
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 2-11, 13-21,
25, 27 and 28 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph as being
based on a non-enabling disclosure; to reject claims 2-11, 13-20,
25, 27 and 28 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by
Reiff ‘370, Reiff, 482 or Reiff ‘737; and to reject claim 21
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Reiff ‘370,
Reiff, 482 or Reiff ‘737, each in view of Lange is reversed.
REVERSED
CHARLES F. WARREN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
PETER F. KRATZ ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
CATHERINE TIMM )
Administrative Patent Judge )
PFK/sld
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007