Appeal No. 2000-0117 Page 6
Application No. 08/770,676
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 22,
mailed December 20, 2000) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the substitute
brief (Paper No. 16, filed December 7, 1998) and reply briefs
(Paper Nos. 19 and 23, filed June 3, 1999 and February 20,
2001, respectively) 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
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
Prior to beginning our analysis we make the following
preliminary notes. First, the examiner has withdrawn the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007