Appeal No. 96-2248
Application 08/341,455
Claims 1 through 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over Angier in view of Nakase.
Claims 5 through 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over Angier in view of Nakase and further in
view of Hamilton.
Claims 12 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Angier in view Nakase and Hamilton and
further in view of Webb.
Claims 15 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Angier in view of Nakase, Hamilton and Webb,
and further in view of Jones.
Reference is made to pages 3-10 of the examiner’s answer
for the details of the examiner’s factual findings and
conclusion of obviousness with respect to the above-outlined
rejections.
The appellants’ brief includes a statement that the
claims do not stand or fall together and includes reasons and
discussion pertinent thereto.
OPINION
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007