Appeal No. 1997-2194 Page 3
Application No. 08/195,018
Claims 1 to 3 and 6 to 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, as containing subject matter which was
not described in the specification in such a way as to
reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the
appellants, at the time the application was filed, had
possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 to 3, 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Sacherer.
Claims 8 to 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Sacherer in view of Cullen.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 23,
mailed July 29, 1996) and the supplemental answers (Paper Nos.
25, 28 and 31, mailed September 30, 1996, October 16, 1996 and
November 29, 1996) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 22,
filed May 13, 1996), reply brief (Paper No. 27, filed
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007