Appeal No. 95-5000 Page 3
Application No. 08/021,883
Bearden 3,852,384 Dec. 3,
1974
Bailey et al. (Bailey) 4,351,730 Sep. 28,
1982
Claims 1 to 5, 8, 9, 27 to 31, 34 and 38 to 43 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Bailey in view of either Bearden or Champeau.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the § 103
rejection, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 29, mailed June 26, 1995) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the appellant's
brief (Paper No. 22, filed April 28, 1995) and reply brief
(Paper No. 30, filed August 29, 1995) for the appellant's
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007