Appeal No. 1998-3312
Application No. 08/354,803
commentary with regard to the above-noted rejections and the
conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and appellant
regarding the rejections, we make reference to the final
rejection (Paper No. 9, mailed December 6, 1996) and the
examiner’s answer (Paper No. 18, mailed February 4, 1998) for
the reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellant’s
brief (Paper No. 17, filed July 9, 1997) and Reply Brief
(Paper No. 19, filed April 6, 1998) for the arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the
examiner.
We first turn to the rejection of claim 25 under 35
U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007