Appeal No. 98-2792
Application 08/516,257
Claims 1, 2, 4 through 9, 15 and 16 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Komives.
Claims 10, 17 and 36 through 38 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Komives in view of
Schultz.3
Rather than attempt to reiterate the examiner's full
commentary with regard to the above-noted rejections and the
conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and appellant
regarding the rejections, we make reference to the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 18, mailed October 1, 1997) for the
examiner's
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellant’s
brief (Paper No. 17, filed September 23, 1997) for appellant’s
argu- ments thereagainst.
3The rejection of claims 2 and 4 through 8 under 35
U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, in the final rejection (Paper
No. 10) has been overcome by the amendment filed June 13, 1997
(Paper No. 11). See the advisory action mailed July 29, 1997
(Paper No. 14).
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007