Appeal No. 1997-0440
Application No. 08/582,237
Appellant’s arguments [brief, pages 28 to 33] are merely of
general nature and can not serve as factual counter evidence
against the Examiner’s specific case of anticipation.
Therefore, we sustain the anticipation rejection of claim 1
and its grouped claims 2, and 5 to 7 over Veranth. In
summary, we have sustained the anticipation rejection of
claims 1, 2, and 5 to 7 over Beaudette or Veranth, while we
have not sustained the rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. §
112, second paragraph.
Accordingly, the decision of the Examiner rejecting
claims 1, 2, and 5 to 7 is affirmed.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007