Appeal No. 97-1260
Application 08/124,774
(British Patent Document)
The claims on appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as follows:3
a) claims 1 through 5, 7 through 11, 13 through 15, 19
and 22 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of Otani and
Riehl;
b) claims 6, 17, 18 and 21 as being unpatentable over
Weber in view of Otani and Riehl, and further in view of
Plantron; and 4
c) claim 12 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of
Otani and Riehl, and further in view of Estebanell.
Reference is made to the appellant’s main and reply
briefs (Paper Nos. 23 and 27) and to the examiner’s final
rejection, main answer and supplemental answer (Paper Nos. 15,
24 and 29) for the respective positions of the appellant and
3In view of the amendment subsequent to final rejection,
the examiner has withdrawn a 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, rejection of claims 17 and 18 which was set forth
for the first time in the main answer (Paper No. 24). See
page 1 in the supplemental answer (Paper No. 29).
4The examiner mistakenly included canceled claim 16 in
the statement of this rejection in both the final rejection
(Paper No. 15) and main answer (Paper No. 24).
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007