Appeal No. 1999-1747 Page 5
Application No. 08/715,422
Claim 16 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Legris in view of Joseph and Guest as
applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dick.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper
No. 6, mailed December 11, 1997) and the answer (Paper No. 14,
mailed December 3, 1998) for the examiner's complete reasoning
in support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 12,
filed September 11, 1998) for the appellant's arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007