Appeal No. 1997-0529 Page 4
Application No. 08/573,884
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 31,
mailed August 16, 1996) and the supplemental answer (Paper No.
33, mailed November 20, 1996) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the brief
(Paper No. 30, filed July 2, 1996) and amendment after new
ground of rejection (Paper No. 32, filed October 1, 1996) 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, and to the respective positions articulated by the
appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of our review,
we make the determinations which follow.
The indefiniteness rejection
In the answer (pp. 3-4), the examiner set forth a new
ground of rejection of claims 18 to 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007