Appeal No. 2001-0014 Page 4
Application No. 09/070,899
rejection have been withdrawn by the examiner since they were
not included in the examiner’s answer. See Ex parte Emm, 118
USPQ 180, 181 (Bd. App. 1957).
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 26,
mailed July 17, 2000) for the examiner’s complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 25,
filed June 13,
2000) and reply brief (Paper No. 27, filed September 12, 2000)
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. After careful review of the evidence before us, it
is our conclusion that the evidence provided by the examiner
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007