Appeal 2007-1699
Application 10/165,904
With respect to the rejection of claims 4, 5, 16 and 23 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103, Schaffer fails to teach several limitations of the claims, as explained
supra. Eichstaedt fails to make up the deficiencies of Schaffer. Therefore,
we will not sustain the rejection of claims 4, 5, 16 and 23 as being obvious
over Schaffer in view of Eichstaedt.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
We conclude that Appellants have shown that the Examiner erred in
rejecting claims 1-24. On the record before us, claims 1-24 have not been
shown to be unpatentable.
DECISION
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-24 is reversed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
REVERSED
KIS
PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS
P. O. BOX 3001
BRIARCLIFF MANOR, NY 10510
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Last modified: September 9, 2013