Appeal No. 2006-2007
Application No. 09/996,225
independent claims 1, 18 and 29, are not shown. Accordingly,
based on the weight of the evidence and the arguments presented
by the Examiner and Appellants, we do not sustain the 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 rejection of claims 1, 4, 13 ad 20 as well as claims 2, 3,
5, 6, 17, 18, 21 and 27-29, dependent thereon, over Albouy and
Hwang.
Turning now to the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 12, we
note that the Examiner further relies on Bijman. However, the
Examiner indicates that Bijman was relied on for teaching the
features of claim 7, which was the base claim of claim 12. As
the Examiner has pointed to no additional teaching in Bijman that
would have overcome the deficiencies of Albouy and Hwang as
discussed above with respect to the independent claims, the 35
U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 12 over Albouy, Hwang and Bijman
cannot be sustained.
CONCLUSION
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the Examiner
rejecting claims 1-6, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 27-29 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007