Appeal No. 2006–0033 Παγε 9
Application No. 10/764,302
our opinion that the examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of anticipation
since Gunnarson does not disclose the claimed single tooth contact.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1, 4
and 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is reversed.
CONCLUSION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007