Appeal No. 96-3146
Application 07/986,489
A. Claims 1 through 4, 6, 8 through 17 and 20 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Ragland in view of Miekka,
Maczuszenko and Kuehrle. [Claim 19 was, by mistake, included
in this rejection, but was withdrawn from this rejection and
included in the new rejection in the supplemental examiner's
answer; see final rejection, page 3, answer, page 2,
supplemental answer, page 4].
B. Claims 5, 7, 18, and 19 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C.
§ 103 over Ragland in view of Miekka, Maczuszenko and Kuehrle
as applied in the above rejection and further in view of Torok
[supplemental answer, page 4].
Reference is made to the appellants' brief, reply brief,
supplemental reply brief, and the examiner's answer and the
supplemental answer for detailed positions of the appellants
and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 1
through 20.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007