Appeal No. 97-0766 Page 4
Application No. 08/287,448
Claim 18 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Gebhardt in view of Withers.
Claims 19 through 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Gebhardt in view of Withers and
Dillman.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 12, mailed October 1, 1996) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the appellant's
brief (Paper No. 11, filed August 16, 1996) 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
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007