Appeal No. 1997-2310
Application No. 08/329,945
Knee et al. (Knee) WO 91/11074 Jul. 07, 1991
Claims 6, 15, and 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as being anticipated by Knee.
Claims 1 through 7, 9 through 17, 19 through 25, and 27
through 35 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Retter in view of Knee.
Reference is made to the Final Rejection (Paper No. 9,
mailed December 15, 1995), the Examiner's Answer (Paper No.
17, mailed September 30, 1996) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellant's
Brief (Paper No. 16, filed August 21, 1996) and Reply Brief
(Paper No. 18, filed December 2, 1996) for appellant's
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the claims, the applied
prior art references, and the respective positions articulated
by appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of our
review, we will reverse both the anticipation rejection of
claims 6, 15, and 23 and also the obviousness rejection of
claims 1 through 7, 9 through 17, 19 through 25, and 27
through 35.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007