Appeal No. 98-1428
Application No. 08/590,388
Jaeger 4,328,895 May 11,
1982
Claims 1 through 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Metcalf in view of Meroney.
Claims 10 through 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Metcalf in view of Meroney as
applied to claims 1 through 9 above, and further in view of
Cote.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's full statement of
the above-noted rejections and the conflicting viewpoints
advanced by the examiner and appellant regarding those
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 10, mailed October 23, 1997) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellant’s
brief (Paper No. 9, filed September 5, 1997) and reply brief
(Paper No. 11, filed October 31, 1997) for appellant’s
arguments thereagainst.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007