Appeal No. 97-2906
Application 08/367,837
Asbeck et al. (Asbeck) 2,780,496 Feb. 5, 1957
Grime et al. (Grime) 5,236,129 Aug. 17, 1993
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Asbeck and Grime.
Claims 2 through 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Asbeck and Grime as applied to claim 1
above, and further in view of Atwater.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's full explanation
of the above-noted rejections and the conflicting viewpoints
advanced by the examiner and appellants regarding the rejections,
we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 11, mailed
March 21, 1997) for the examiner's reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to appellants’ brief (Paper No. 10, filed
February 5, 1997) and reply brief (Paper No. 12, filed April 21,
1997) for appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellants’ specification and claims, to
the applied prior art, and to the respective positions
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007