Appeal No. 1998-1787 Page 3
Application No. 08/151,257
Claim 11 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Stevens in view of Onishi as applied to
claim 1 above, and further in view of Jabsen.
Claims 1 through 7 and 12 through 22 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Koch in view of
Onishi.
Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Koch in view of Onishi as applied to claim 1
above, and further in view of Stevens.
Claim 11 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Koch in view of Onishi as applied to claim 1
above, and further in view of Jabsen.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 18,
mailed September 3, 1997) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the brief
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007