Ex parte ALEXANDER et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 1997-0674                                                        
          Application No. 08/214,971                                                  

          claims of record in this application.                                       
               The appellants’ invention is directed to a method of                   
          encapsulating waste material for safe disposal thereof (claims              
          1-15) and to a waste encapsulation system (claim 16).  The                  
          claims before us on appeal have been reproduced in an appendix              
          to the Brief.                                                               
                                   THE REFERENCES                                     
               The references relied upon by the examiner to support the              
          final rejection are:                                                        
          Stein et al. (Stein)          4,886,164                Dec. 12,             
          1989                                                                        
          Gallo et al. (Gallo)          5,186,351                Feb. 16,             
          1993                                                                        
          Mains et al. (Mains)          5,196,132                Mar. 23,             
          1993                                                                        

                                    THE REJECTION                                     
               Claims 1-16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being              
          unpatentable over Stein in view of Gallo and Mains.                         
               Rather than attempt to reiterate the examiner’s full                   
          commentary with regard to the above-noted rejection and the                 
          conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the                     
          appellants regarding the rejection, we make reference to the                
          final rejection (Paper No. 9) and the Examiner’s Answer (Paper              

                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007