Appeal No. 97-1439 Page 4
Application No. 08/417,981
Claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Namur in view of Garringer and Gilbert.
Claim 7 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Namur in view of Garringer and Yokomatsu.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and the appellants regarding the § 103 and § 112
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No.
12, mailed December 3, 1996) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the appellants'
brief (Paper No. 11, filed October 28, 1996) and reply brief
(Paper No. 13, filed February 7, 1997) 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