Appeal No. 1998-0204
Application 08/501,542
anticipated by, or in the alternative under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Sampietro.
Claims 2 and 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Sampietro.
Claims 5, 10 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Sampietro in view of Kelsic.
Claims 5, 10 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Sampietro in view of
Campbell. 1
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or
the Examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answer
for the details thereof.
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we
agree with the Examiner that claims 1, 4, 6 through 9, 11
through 13, 15 and 18 through 22 are properly rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(e), and in the alternative under 35 U.S.C. §
1 A rejection of claims 1-5 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
paragraph 2, was withdrawn, see answer-page 4.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007