Appeal No. 95-2721 Page 4
Application No. 08/054,927
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper
No. 6, mailed March 21, 1994) and the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 13, mailed December 22, 1994) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the appellants'
brief (Paper No. 11, filed September 30, 1994) for the
appellants' arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
The anticipation issue
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 and 2
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007