Appeal No. 2001-0386 Page 4
Application No. 08/614,358
Claims 3, 4, 6, 9, 11, 12, 14 to 16, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26
to 28, 30 and 32 to 34 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Delany in view of Coleman, Jr.
Claims 7 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Delany in view of Coleman, Jr. as
applied above, and further in view of Meharg.
Claims 19 and 31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Delany in view of Coleman, Jr. as
applied above, and further in view of Schneider.
Claims 17 and 29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Delany in view of Coleman, Jr. as
applied above, and further in view of Weigert.
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. 15, mailed March 30, 2000) and the answer (Paper No. 18,
mailed September 15, 2000) for the examiner's complete
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007