Appeal No. 96-0561
Application 08/055,584
Claims 1, 4, 7 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Hirmer.
Claims 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10 through 21 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hirmer in view
of Rossmann.
Rather than attempt to reiterate the examiner's full
commentary with regard to the above-noted rejections and the
conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and appellant
regarding the rejections, we make reference to the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 14, mailed August 14, 1995) for the examiner's
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellant's brief
(Paper No. 13, filed June 9, 1995) for appellant's arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellant's specification and claims, to
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007