Appeal No. 1997-2150
Application No. 08/350,777
Claims 1, 7, and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Villa-Real in view of Wells.
Claims 2 through 6 and 8 through 13 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Villa-Real in view
of Wells and Becker, with the addition of Thorsten for claims
5 and 6 and the addition of Brandenstein for claim 12.
Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 13,
mailed December 23, 1996) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellants'
Brief (Paper
No. 12, filed September 19, 1996) and Reply Brief (Paper No.
14, filed January 8, 1997) for appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the claims, the applied
prior art references, and the respective positions articulated
by appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of our
review, we will reverse the obviousness rejections of claims 1
through 13 and 20.
Regarding the rejection of claims 1, 7, and 20,
appellants argue (Brief, page 7) that "nothing in Villa-Real
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007