Appeal No. 98-1947
Application 08/431,702
Independent claims 1 and 4 are representative of the
subject matter on appeal and a copy of those claims appears in
the Appendix to appellants’ brief.
The sole prior art reference of record listed by the
examiner (answer, page 2) as relied upon in rejecting the
appealed claims is:
Young et al. (Young ‘239) 5,186,239 Feb. 16, 1993
Claims 1 through 4 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Young.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's full statement of
the above-noted rejection and the conflicting viewpoints
advanced by the examiner and appellants regarding the
rejection, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 20, mailed
November 19, 1997) for the examiner's reasoning in support of
the rejection, and to appellants’ brief (Paper No. 19, filed
September 3, 1997) for appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007