Appeal No. 1997-0416
Application No. 08/125,406
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Herrig et al. (Herrig) 4,835,737 May 30, 1989
Murphy 5,128,970 Jul. 07, 1992
Smith et al. (Smith) 5,167,024 Nov. 24, 1992
Admitted prior art in Figure 1
Claims 1-4, 7-8 and 14-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Admitted prior art in Figure 1 in view of Herrig and Murphy. Claims 5, 6,
1
9-13 and 19-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Admitted prior art in Figure 1, Herrig and Murphy in view of Smith.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 11, mailed Sep. 4, 1996) for the examiner's reasoning in support of
the rejections, and to the amended appellants’ brief (Paper No. 14, filed Dec. 5, 1997) for
the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
We note that the examiner has rejected claims 12 and 13 in the body of the rejection, but did not1
include these 2 claims in the heading.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007