Appeal No. 97-0082
Application No. 07/993,718
Claim 23 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph.
Claims 1-4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Ranford in view of Bales.
Claims 5-15 and 18-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Ranford in view of Bales and Kalt.
The examiner’s rejections are explained on pages 5-10 of the
answer. Rather than reiterate the arguments of the appellants
and examiner in support of their respective positions, reference
is made to the brief, amended reply brief, answer and
supplemental answer for the full exposition thereof.
OPINION
As a preliminary matter we note that the appellants have
presented arguments concerning the propriety of (1) the examiner
entering new grounds of rejection in the answer and (2) of the
group director “conditionally” granting the appellants’ petition
filed on April 7, 1995. Under 35 U.S.C. § 134 and 37 CFR
4(...continued)
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ranford in the answer,
we presume the examiner has withdrawn the final rejection of the
appealed claims on these grounds. See Ex parte Emm, 118 USPQ
180, 181 (Bd. App. 1957).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007