Appeal No. 98-2034
Application No. 08/571,276
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Bachrach in view of Federbush, as applied to claims 1 and 13,
and further in view of Acker; and
Claims 9, 10 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Bachrach in view of Federbush and
Acker, as applied to claims 2 and 14, and further in view of
Boelema.
The full text of the examiner's rejections and the
responses to the arguments presented by appellants appear in
the answer (Paper No. 16), while the complete statement of
appellants' arguments can be found in the brief.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we have made the
determinations which follow.
The rejection of claims 1, 8, 11-13, 18, 22 and 23
under 35 U.S.C. § 103
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007