Appeal No. 2000-0327 Page 3
Application No. 08/745,330
Claims 1, 2, 11, and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) being anticipated by Thompson.
Claims 3, 4, 13, 14, 16, 17, and 19-21 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Thompson.
Claims 5, 15, and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Thompson in view of
Gastouniotis.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 16, mailed March 29, 1999) and the final rejection (Paper
No. 9, mailed September 9, 1998) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellant's
brief (Paper No. 15, filed February 8, 1999) for appellant's
arguments thereagainst. Only those arguments actually made by
appellant have been considered in this decision. Arguments
which appellant could have made but chose not to make in the
brief have not been considered. See 37 CFR 1.192(a).
OPINION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007