Appeal No. 95-1357
Application 07/965,427
being unpatentable over Clark and Cadoz.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the briefs and answers for the 2 3
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 1 through 15
under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
2Appellants filed an appeal brief on February 22, 1994. We
will refer to this appeal brief as simply the brief. Appellants
filed a reply appeal brief on June 15, 1994. We will refer to
this reply appeal brief as the reply brief. The Examiner
responded to the reply brief with a Supplemental answer, thereby
entering and considering the reply brief.
3The Examiner responded to the brief with an Examiner's
answer, dated May 18, 1994. We will refer to the Examiner's
answer as simply the answer. The Examiner responded to the reply
brief with a supplemental Examiner's answer, dated September 7,
1996. We will refer to the Supplemental Examiner's answer as
simply the supplemental answer.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007