Appeal No. 97-1394
Application 08/500,178
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 21, 22, 25, 26, 29 and 32 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Mills.
Claims 23, 24, 27, 28, 30, 31, 33 and 34 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Mills in
view of Distiso.
According to appellant, all of the pending claims on
appeal, that is claims 21 through 34, are to be considered as
a single group. However, we note that appellant has sepa-
rately
argued the rejection of claims 23, 24, 27, 28, 30, 31, 33 and
34, the claims rejected under § 103. Furthermore, the exam-
iner has responded to appellant’s arguments at pages 7 and 8
of the answer. In situations such as this where appellant and
the examiner have fully articulated their views on the rejec-
tion, we deem it appropriate to review the § 103 rejection
separately from the rejection based on § 102. Accordingly,
claims 21, 22, 25, 26, 29 and 32 will be considered as one
group with the broadest independent claim, claim 29, as repre-
sentative thereof, and claims 23, 24, 27, 28, 30, 31, 33 and
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007