Appeal No. 97-0313
Application No. 08/346,083
The examiner has withdrawn the final rejection of
appealed claims 6 and 10 and has indicated that these claims
are allowable (see page 2 of Answer).
Regarding the rejection of claims 7-9 and 11-13 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over McAllister in view of French '510,
appellants submit that the claims stand or fall together (see
page 9 of Brief).
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellants' arguments
for patentability, as well as the specification data relied
upon in support thereof. However, we are in full agreement
with the examiner that the subject matter of appealed claims
7-9 and 11-13 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
in the art within the meaning of § 103 in view of the applied
prior art. Accordingly, we will sustain the examiner's
rejections for the reasons set forth in the Answer, which we
incorporate herein. We add the following primarily for
emphasis.
We consider first the rejection of claims 7-9 and 11-13
over McAllister in view of French '510. There is no dispute
that the only difference between the monomers of McAllister,
which are used to produce a polymer for the core material of
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007