Appeal 2006-3406
Application 10/383,906
1 convinced of error on the part of the Examiner in rejecting claims 1-7 under
2 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Repka in view of Smith.
3
4 CONCLUSION OF LAW
5 On the record before us, Appellant has shown that the claims are
6 definite within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 112 (second paragraph), and that
7 the examiner erred in rejecting the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
8 However, we hold that Appellants failed to show that the Examiner erred in
9 rejecting claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
10 Repka in view of Smith. The rejection of claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. § 112
11 (second paragraph) is not sustained. The rejection of claims 1-7 under 35
12 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Kennedy is not sustained. The
13 rejection of claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
14 Repka in view of Smith is sustained.
15
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013