Appeal No. 96-3949
Application No. 08/230,383
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by the disclosure of Okude.
Claims 3-6, 10-14, and 16-24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of Okude in view
of Shahookar.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or the
Examiner, we make reference to the Briefs and the Answer for 2
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the Examiner and the
evidence of anticipation and obviousness relied upon by the
Examiner as support for the rejections. We have, likewise,
reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching our
decision, the Appellants’ arguments set forth in the Briefs
along with the Examiner’s rationale in support of the
rejections and arguments in rebuttal set forth in the
Examiner’s Answer.
2The appeal Brief was filed March 4, 1996. In response
to the Examiner's Answer dated May 24, 1996, a Reply Brief was
filed June 27, 1996 which was acknowledged and entered by the
Examiner without further comment on August 22, 1996.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007