Appeal No. 1996-3108
Application No. 08/064,010
Claims 23 through 27 and 46 through 51 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by the IBM TDB.
Claims 30 and 54 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Ezzo in view of Craft.
Claims 31, 32, 55 and 56 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over the IBM TDB.
Reference is made to the final rejection, the revised
brief, the reply brief and the answer for the respective2
positions of the appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
Except for the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims
23 through 27 and 46 through 51, all of the rejections are
reversed.
According to the examiner (Answer, page 4), “Ezzo
discloses a board 11 with superposed layers 12, 12a with
The brief as opposed to the reply brief is the proper2
vehicle to present initial arguments concerning the
patentability of a claim on appeal. The reply brief should be
limited to a response to any new arguments made by the
examiner.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007