Appeal 2007-1436
Application 10/390,318
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
We conclude that Appellants have shown that the Examiner erred in
rejecting claims 1-9, 12-15, 17, 20-23, and 25 as unpatentable over Beaulieu and
Diederiks, and claims 16, 18, and 19 as unpatentable over Beaulieu, Diederiks,
and Mattice.
DECISION
The Examiner’s decision under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) to reject claims 1-9,
12-15, 17, 20-23, and 25 as unpatentable over Beaulieu and Diederiks, and claims
16, 18, and 19 as unpatentable over Beaulieu, Diederiks, and Mattice is reversed.
The application is remanded to the Examiner pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(a)(1)
(2006) for consideration of prior art.
REVERSED AND REMANDED
jlb
PATENT LAW GROUP LLP
2635 NORTH FIRST STREET
SUITE 223
SAN JOSE, CA 95134
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Last modified: September 9, 2013