Appeal No. 2006-0484 Page 11
Application No. 09/657,729
Since the examiner has not adequately shown that this feature of claim 11 is taught or
suggested by the prior art, we reverse the rejection of claim 11.
Summary
We affirm the rejections of claims 1 and 51 as anticipated by Higgins and the
rejection of claim 1 as anticipated by Weetall. Claims 2-10, 12, 13, and 47-50 fall with
claim 1. However, we reverse the rejection of claim 11, so that claim is not subject to
any outstanding rejection.
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Toni R. Scheiner )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
Donald E. Adams )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
Eric Grimes )
Administrative Patent Judge )
EG/jlb
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007