Appeal No. 1996-1767 Page 4
Application No. 08/220,410
for failing to provide an adequate written description of
claims 9-11. Rather than repeat the arguments of the
appellants or examiner in toto, we refer the reader to the
briefs and the answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we considered
the subject matter on appeal and the rejections and evidence
advanced by the examiner. We also considered the arguments of
the appellants and examiner. After considering the entire
record before us, we are not persuaded that the examiner erred
in rejecting claims 1-8, 12-16, and 25-32 under § 102(b);
claims 1, 4-8, 14-16, 25-30, and 32 under § 102(e); or claims
18-24 under § 103. We are persuaded, however, that the
examiner erred in rejecting claims 9-11 under § 112, ¶ 1.
Moreover, we are persuaded to reject claims 9-11 under § 112,
¶ 2. Accordingly, we affirm-in-part. We address the claim
groupings, the outstanding rejections, and the new rejection
seriatim.
Claim Groupings
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007