Appeal No. 97-0755 Page 4
Application No. 08/400,066
35 U.S.C. § 102(a)/(e) as being anticipated by Lipinski.
Claim 17 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Lipinski in view of Ishii.
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. 7, mailed November 18, 1995) and the examiner's answer
(Paper No. 14, mailed July 30, 1996) for the examiner's
complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the
appellants' brief (Paper No. 13, filed July 1, 1996) 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.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007