Appeal No. 95-2303
Application 07/896,073
of the appealed claims and the applied prior art. We refer to
pages 3 through 6 of the Answer for a more specific
explanation of why the appellant's arguments are not
convincing.
We see no useful purpose in further burdening the record
of this application by reiterating the findings of fact,
conclusions of law, and responses to argument expressed by the
examiner in the final office action and Answer. Accordingly,
we hereby adopt these findings, conclusions, and responses as
our own, and concomitantly we hereby sustain the examiner's §
103 rejection of claims 1 through 6, 29 through 35, 39, and 40
as being unpatentable over Davis in view of Dasai and his
rejection of claims 36 and 37 as being unpatentable over
Kennedy in view of Sabol.
The decision of the examiner is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007