Appeal No. 97-2734
Application 08/394,067
c) claim 11 as being unpatentable over Stein in view
of Acosta as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of
Greatwood.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's full statement
of the above-noted rejections and the conflicting viewpoints
advanced by the examiner and appellants regarding those
rejections, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper
No. 20, mailed March 5, 1996) and to the examiner's answer
(Paper No. 29, mailed February 19, 1997) for the examiner's
complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to
appellants' brief (Paper No. 28, filed December 6, 1996) for
appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have
given careful consideration to appellants' specification and
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007