Appeal No. 98-1253
Application No. 08/249,931
Claims 1 and 7-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as being anticipated by Otani.3
Claims 1 and 7-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Scowen in view of Vogel.
The rejections are explained on page 3 of the answer.
The arguments of the appellants and examiner in support of
their respective positions may be found on pages 4-18 of the
brief, pages 3-15 of the reply brief, pages 4 and 5 of the
answer and page 5 of the "supplemental answer."4
OPINION
Considering first the rejection of claims 1, 7-9, 11-15
and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by
3This rejection was set forth as a new ground of
rejection on page 3 of the answer (Paper No. 18).
4Although the action mailed November 6, 1997 (Paper No.
21) was styled a "SUPPLEMENTAL EXAMINER'S ANSWER," this action
inexplicably repeated the answer (Paper No. 18) in its
entirety (including the previously set forth new ground of
rejection just as if it was now being set forth for the first
time), except that (1) the last line of page 3 of the answer
was apparently inadvertently omitted and (2) the following
sentence was added on page 5: "The examiner has carefully
reviewed the reply brief filed July 28, 1997 and has concluded
that his position is clear and complete."
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007