Appeal No. 98-3287
Reissue Application 08/354,624
(1) Claims 1 through 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Tomlinson in view of Thomae;
and
(2) Claims 1 through 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
251 as being based on a defective reissue declaration.4
The rejections are explained in the Examiner's Answer
(Paper No. 17).
The opposing viewpoints of the appellant are set forth in
appellant's Brief and the Reply Brief (Papers Nos. 16 and 18).
OPINION
We shall not sustain the examiner's § 103 or § 251
rejection of claims 1 through 23. With respect to all of the
appealed claims, we enter a new ground of rejection under the
provisions of 37 CFR 1.196(b). We begin with the new ground
of rejection.
Claims 1 through 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, as being indefinite and hence failing to
The final rejection also included a rejection of claims 1 through 234
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on Tomlinson in view of Kerivan. However, that
particular rejection has been withdrawn (answer, page 5).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007