Appeal 2007-1348
Application 10/650,253
1 G. Conclusions of law
2 Appellants have sustained their burden on appeal of showing that the
3 Examiner erred in rejecting claims 125 and 128-144 as being based on a lack
4 of enablement under the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112.
5 Appellants have sustained their burden on appeal of showing that the
6 Examiner erred in rejecting claims 125 and 128-144 as being anticipated
7 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) by Bright.
8 Appellants have sustained their burden on appeal of showing that the
9 Examiner erred in rejecting claims 125 and 128-144 as being unpatentable
10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Singer and Curatolo.
11
12 H. Decision
13 ORDERED that the decisions of the Examiner rejecting
14 claims 125 and 128-144 (1) for lack of enablement, (2) as being anticipated
15 by Bright, alternatively unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), and (3) as
16 being unpatentable over Singer and Curatolo are reversed.
17 FURTHER ORDERED that no time period for taking any
18 subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under
19 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (2006).
20
21 REVERSED
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013