Appeal No. 1998-3420
Application 08/597,033
Claim 10 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Potter.
Claim 15 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Reisman or Cheng in view of Thorud.
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 appellants
regarding the rejections, we make reference to the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 17, mailed June 4, 1998) for the reasoning
in support of the rejections, and to appellants’ brief (Paper
No. 16, filed April 30, 1998) and reply brief (Paper No. 18,
filed July 2, 1998) for the arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have
given careful consideration to appellants’ specification and
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007