Appeal No. 1998-2981
Application No. 08/763,390
are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Bahder in view of Senior as applied to claim 1 and further in
view of Nelson. Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Bahder in view of Senior as
applied to claim 1 and further in view of Ballet.
Rather than reiterate all arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the brief and answer for the
respective details thereof.2
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to Appellants' specification and claims,
to the applied prior art references, and to the respective
positions articulated by Appellants and the Examiner.
2 Rather than attempt to reiterate the Examiner's full
commentary with regard to the above-noted rejections and the
conflicting viewpoints advanced by the Examiner and Appellants
regarding the rejections, we make reference to the Examiner's
answer (Paper No. 11, mailed June 5, 1998) for the reasoning
in support of the rejections, and to Appellants' brief (Paper
No. 10, filed May 14, 1998) for the arguments thereagainst.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007