Appeal No. 96-1931
Application 07/995,635
Agostinelli et al. (Agostinelli) 5,017,551 May 21, 1991
Claims 1, 5, 8, 9 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
' 102(b) as being anticipated by the disclosure of Sulcs. Claims
2, 6 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 as being unpat-
entable over Sulcs and Acommon knowledge in the art@ [answer,
page 5]. Claims 4, 7 and 11-13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
' 103 as being unpatentable over Sulcs and Acommon knowledge in
the art@ and further in view of Coaton and Koury [answer, page
6].
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner and the evidence
of anticipation and obviousness relied upon by the examiner as
support for the rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and
taken into consideration, in reaching our decision, the appel-
lants' arguments set forth in the briefs along with the exam-
iner's rationale in support of the rejections and arguments in
rebuttal set forth in the examiner's answer.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007