Appeal No. 1997-4264
Application No. 08/421,131
first paragraph, rejection of claims 1 through 24 in the
answer. According, the following rejections are before us for
review:
(1) Claims 1 through 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, as lacking support in the original
disclosure.
(2) Claims 1 through 4 and 6 through 20 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Lawson in
view of Van Vliet, Burger, Zafiroglu '169 and Zafiroglu '421.
(3) Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Lawson, Van Vliet, Burger, Zafiroglu
'169 and Zafiroglu '421, as applied to claim 1 and further in
view of Zafiroglu '238.
(4) Claims 1 and 21 through 24 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Greene.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the Office action mailed
December 14, 1994 (Paper No. 8), to the final rejection (Paper
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007