Appeal No. 97-4211
Application 98/614,844
(European Patent)
Claims 1, 2 and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Peters in view of Brady.
Claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Peters in view of Brady as applied to claims
1 and 2 above, and further in view of MAN.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's full statement of
the above-noted rejections and the conflicting viewpoints
advanced by the examiner and appellant regarding those
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 18, mailed June 24, 1997) for the examiner's reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to appellant’s brief (Paper No.
16, filed April 21, 1997) for appellant’s arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
document as “MAN.”
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007