Appeal No. 95-4589
Application 08/042,888
Claims 9, 10 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over McComb in view of Forrest, Swanson
and Turner.
The examiner’s rejections are explained on pages 3-5 of
the answer. Rather than reiterate the arguments of the
appellant and examiner in support of their respective
positions, reference is made to pages 3-6 of the brief, pages
1-3 of the reply brief, pages 5-8 of the answer and pages 1-3
of the supplemental answer for the details thereof.
OPINION
As a preliminary matter we note that (a) on page 3 of the
brief the appellant has stated that the “groups of claims as
present in the rejections of the Examiner can be included
together in the groups as specified in [sic] the Examiner” and
(b) the examiner has stated on page 2 of the answer that
claims 1-3, 5-8, 11, 12, 14-16 and 18-20 stand or fall
together as a first group, claims 4 and 13 stand or fall
together as a second group and claims 9, 10 and 17 stand or
fall together as a third group. Accordingly, with respect to
the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (1) claims 1-3, 5-8, 11,
12, 14-16 and 18-20 will stand or fall with representative
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007