Appeal No. 2005-1293 6
Application No. 09/453,480
together isolated disclosures and teachings of the prior art so that the claimed invention
is rendered obvious.
Since we have determined that the teachings and suggestions found in Simmons
and Huston or in Simmons and Wilhelm would not have made the subject matter as a
whole of independent claims 4 and 11 on appeal obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art at the time of appellants’ invention, we must refuse to sustain the examiner’s
rejection of those claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103. It follows that the examiner’s rejection
of dependent claims 6, 7 and 13 through 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on the
teachings of Simmons and Huston or Wilhelm will likewise not be sustained.
In light of the foregoing, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 4, 6, 7, 11
and 13 through 15 of the present application under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed.
REVERSED
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007