Appeal No. 1999-1451
Application No. 08/481,593
unpatentable over Klass in view of Lewin. Claims 5, 6, 17, and 18 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Klass in view of Briglia.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Office action
setting forth the rejection (Paper No. 15, mailed June 23, 1997) and the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 24, mailed Aug. 4, 1998) for the examiner's reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to the appellant's brief (Paper No. 23, filed Jun. 15, 1998) and reply brief
(Paper No. 26, filed Oct. 8, 1998) for the appellant's 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. As a consequence of
our review, we make the determinations which follow.
At the outset we note that the examiner has repeatedly referenced many of the Office
actions throughout the answer. Rather than remand this case for a proper statement of the
rejection and answer to the arguments in a single document, we have referenced the
prosecution history as the examiner has argued through the answer, and we find that
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007