Appeal No. 1996-3434
Application No. 08/063,279
GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claims 1-8 and 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 as being
unpatentable over Houghten in view of Lam and Raucher.
Claims 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 as being unpatentable over
Houghten in view of Lam and Raucher as applied to claims 1-8 and 10-16 above, and
further in view of Nyéki.
We reverse the rejections under 35 U.S.C. ' 103.
DISCUSSION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants= specification and claims, and to the respective positions articulated by
the appellants and the examiner. We make reference to the examiner=s Answer (Paper
No. 16, mailed June 12, 1995), for the examiner=s reasoning in support of the rejection.
We further reference appellants= Brief (Paper No. 15, filed February 15, 1995), for the
appellants= arguments in favor of patentability.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007