Appeal No. 95-2111
Application 07/771,173
Claim 10 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Vassiliadis.
The examiner’s answer contains the following new
rejections:
Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Vassiliadis.
Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Davies.
Rather than reiterate the examiner’s full statement
of the above-noted rejections and the conflicting viewpoints
advanced by the appellants and the examiner regarding those
rejections, we make reference to the Examiner's Answer (Paper
No. 13) and the Supplemental Answer (Paper No. 17) for the
examiner’s complete reasoning in support of the rejections and
the Appellants’ Brief (Paper No. 11) and Reply (Paper No. 16)
for the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
At the outset, we note that the appellants have
argued that the examiner erred in designating the rejection as
final. We do not have jurisdiction to decide this issue.
Rather, as the examiner has pointed out in the answer, an
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007