Appeal No. 98-1461 Page 4
Application No. 08/335,153
Claims 17, 20 through 22 and 25 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Bronstad.
Claims 17, 19 through 22, 25 and 27 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Sicking in view of
Bronstad.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper
No. 17, mailed March 17, 1997) and the examiner's answer
(Paper No. 25, mailed December 8, 1997) for the examiner's
complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the
appellants' brief (Paper No. 24, filed November 13, 1997) for
the appellants' arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007