Appeal No. 96-3258
Application 08/241,875
meaning of the same phrase further amplify the ambiguities of
the presently claimed invention. As a whole, appellant’s
arguments in the Brief confirm the examiner’s questions and
ambiguities raised in the Answer as well as add to them.
Inasmuch as there are no arguments presented as to
dependent claims 5 to 10, and in view of the fact that the
subject matter of independent claim 13 on appeal mirrors the
above language of independent claim 4 and further adds to it,
the rejection of these claims is also sustained. Therefore,
the decision of the examiner rejecting claims 4 to 10 and 13
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, is affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007