Appeal No. 97-2720 Page 4
Application No. 08/354,387
Claims 5 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over DuBois in view of Scott.
Claims 11 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over DuBois in view of Paxon.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 10, mailed February 14, 1997) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the appellants'
brief (Paper No. 9, filed November 29, 1996) 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