Appeal No. 97-1476 Page 5
Application No. 08/458,689
Claims 15 through 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Hawkins in view of Maasbach, Green
and Takahisa.
Claim 20 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Hawkins in view of Maasbach, Green and
O'Sullivan.
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. 11, mailed November 18, 1996) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the appellant's
brief (Paper No. 10, filed July 15, 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 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007