Ex parte JAMES ZAGUROLI, JR. - Page 4

          Appeal No. 97-0750                                                          
          Application 08/329,219                                                      

                    Claim 6 stands additionally rejected under 35 U.S.C.              
           112, first paragraph, as containing subject matter which was              
          not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one           
          skilled in the art to which it pertains to make and/or use the              

                    Reference is made to the examiner's answer (Paper                 
          No. 7, mailed August 30, 1996) for the examiner's full reasoning            
          in support of the above-noted rejections and to appellant's brief           
          (Paper No. 6, filed July 17, 1996) for appellant's arguments                

                    Our evaluation of the issues raised in this appeal has            
          included a careful assessment of appellant's specification and              
          claims, the applied prior art references and the respective                 
          positions advanced by appellant and the examiner.  As a                     
          consequence of our review, we have come to the conclusion, for              
          the reasons which follow, that the examiner's rejection of the              
          appealed claims under 35 U.S.C.  103 will not be sustained.                
          In addition, we will also not sustain the examiner's rejection              
          of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C.  112, first paragraph.                          

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007