Appeal No. 98-1291
Application No. 08/586,524
Claims 1 and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Koch.3
Claims 6 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Koch in view of Chereda.
Claims 2 and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Koch.4
The rejections are explained in the Examiner's Answer.
The arguments of the appellants in opposition to the
Examiner’s positions are set forth in the Brief and the Reply
Brief.
OPINION
In reaching our decision on the issues raised in this
appeal, we have carefully assessed the claims, the prior art
applied against the claims, and the respective views of the
3In the final rejection (Paper No. 5), the examiner
rejected claims 1-5 as being anticipated by Koch. In view of
the appellants’ arguments in the Brief, this rejection now
stands applied only to claims 1 and 5, with claim 3 being
indicated as allowable and a new rejection being entered with
regard to claims 2 and 4 (Answer, pages 3 and 4).
4This is a new rejection, set forth for the first time in
the Answer.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007