Appeal No. 2005-2181 Page 7
Application No. 10/044,268
describe a need for improved light transmission or a problem with scratching.
Therefore, this reasoning can not be utilized to form the motivation to establish a prima
facie case of obviousness.
In view of the foregoing, we will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 1
and 11.
We will likewise not sustain the rejection of the remaining claims as each of the
remaining rejections is based on the combination of Pelekhaty and Rancourt.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007