Appeal No. 1997-0689
Application No. 08/047,238
Tietig 2,280,358 Apr. 21, 1942
Lueder 3,236,290 Feb. 22, 1966
Gerritsen (Gerritsen I) 5,009,484 Apr. 23,
1991
Gerritsen et al. 5,048,925 Sep. 17, 1991
(Gerritsen II)
Zhang et al. (Zhang) 5,164,856 Nov. 17, 1992
Claim 23 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, as being non-enabled by the specification.
Claims 1, 12, 14, 18, 23 through 27 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of
Gerritsen II, further in view of Gerritsen I (for clam 14),
Tietig (for claim 18), or Lueder (for claim 25).
Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 25,
mailed February 1, 1996) for the examiner's complete reasoning
in support of the rejections, and to the appellant's Brief
(Paper No. 24, filed November 20, 1995) and Reply Brief (Paper
No. 28, filed March 20, 1996) for the appellant's arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the claims, the applied
prior art references, and the respective positions articulated
by the appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of our
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007