Appeal No. 97-3640
Application No. 08/406,272
THE ISSUES
The issues presented for review are: (1) whether the examiner erred in rejecting claims 1-5
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Skraba; (2) whether the examiner erred in rejecting claims
1-5, 9-11 and 16-19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Skraba in view of Strack; (3)
whether the examiner erred in rejecting claims 23-25 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over McKernan in view of Jones; (4) whether the examiner erred in rejecting
claims 1-25 over 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over HP in view of Cheron; and, (5) whether the
examiner erred in provisionally rejecting claims 1-25 under the judicially created doctrine of
obviousness-type double patenting over claims 1-25 of copending Application 08/162,241 in view of
Cheron.
DELIBERATIONS
Our deliberations in this matter have included evaluation and review of the following materials:
(1) the instant specification, including all of the claims on appeal; (2) appellant's Appeal Brief before the
Board; (3) the Examiner's Answer; (4) the above-cited prior art references; and, (5) the pending claims
in Application 08/162,241.
OPINION
Page 4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007