Appeal No. 1997-0569
Application No. 08/150,559
stated to be appellants’ Admitted Prior Art (APA), as set
forth at
page 5, lines 3-10 of the specification.
Claims 7, 9, 13 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Wright in view of Lewis.
Claims 1, 3 and 19 through 22 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Wright in view of
Lewis as applied above, and further in view of APA.
Claims 5, 6, 11, 12, 17 and 18 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Wright in view of
Lewis as applied above, and further in view of Doherty.
Reference is made to the answer (Paper No. 32, mailed
September 4, 1996) for the examiner's full reasoning in
support of the above-noted rejections and to appellants’ brief
(Paper
No. 30, filed March 12, 1996) for the arguments thereagainst.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007