Appeal No. 97-1166
Application 08/198,848
Miura and Mowry, and further in view of Garnier. These claims
stand or fall together [brief, page 5]. Appellant has presented
no additional arguments in support of the patentability of these
dependent claims. Since the additionally applied reference to
Garnier fails to overcome the deficiencies noted above in the
basic combination of references, the invention of dependent
claims 10-18 is also not suggested by the applied prior art.
Therefore, we also do not sustain the rejection of claims 10-18.
In summary, we have not sustained either of the
examiner’s rejections of the claims. Accordingly, the decision
of the examiner rejecting claims 1-20 is reversed.
REVERSED
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007