Appeal No. 2005-2656
Application No. 09/805,586
deployment sequence sought by Yamamoto to avoid obstruction by a seat belt. The
only suggestion to combine Yamamoto and Okumura in the manner advanced by the
examiner stems from hindsight knowledge impermissibly derived from the appellant’s
disclosure.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of
independent claims 1, 11 and 12, and dependent claims 2-4, 7-10, 13-15 and 18-20, as
being unpatentable over Yamamoto in view of Okumura.
III. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 5, 6, 16 and 17 as being unpatentable
over Yamamoto in view of Okumura and Matsushima
As the examiner’s application of Matsushima does not cure the above discussed
shortcomings of Yamamoto and Okumura relative to parent claims 1 and 12, we shall
not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of dependent claims 5, 6, 16 and
17 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto in view of Okumura and Matsushima.
SUMMARY
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-20 is reversed.
REVERSED
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007