Appeal No. 2006-2413 Page 18
Application No. 10/250,412
To summarize, in our view, the examiner has not adequately explained why each
of Izumi ‘807, Nadolsky and Pomerhn, even when combined with Izumi ‘316 and Burge,
would have led one skilled in the art to the compositions and processes recited in the
claims. We therefore reverse the obviousness rejections of claims 3-19, 21-23, 25-40
and 52-56 over Izumi ‘807, Nadolsky and Pomerhn.
REVERSED
Demetra J. Mills )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
Eric Grimes )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
Nancy J. Linck )
Administrative Patent Judge )
EG/FP/jlb
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013