Appeal No. 97-1033
Application 08/190,485
Claims 1 through 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Schuh.
The full text of the examiner's rejections and response
to the argument presented by appellant appears in the final
rejection and answer (Paper Nos. 9 and 16), while the complete
statement of appellant’s argument can be found in the brief
(Paper No. 15).4
As indicated by the examiner (answer, page 2), appel-
lant has not included a statement that the claims do not stand or
fall together. Thus, pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7), we select
single claim 4 and shall decide the appeal on the basis thereof
relative to the anticipation rejection.
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the issues raised in this
appeal, this panel of the board has carefully considered appel-
lant’s specification and method claim 4, the applied patent, and
the respective viewpoints of appellant and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we make the determinations which
follow.
4 A supplemental brief was filed (Paper No. 20) to provide
information omitted from the original brief.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007