Appeal No. 97-1400
Application 08/394,409
Claims 5 and 10 through 13 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Zell in view of Prochaska
and Rozmus.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's full explanation
of the above-noted rejections and the conflicting viewpoints
advanced by the examiner and appellant regarding those
rejections, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper No.
6, mailed December 6, 1995) and to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 9, mailed July 8, 1996) for the examiner's reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to appellant's brief (Paper No. 8,
filed May 16, 1996) and reply brief (Paper No. 10, filed July 30,
1996) for appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellant's specification and claims, to
the applied prior art references, and to the respective positions
articulated by appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of
this review, we have made the determination that the examiner's
rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 will not be sustained. Our
reasons follow.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007