Appeal No. 1997-2857
Application 08/171,175
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the Examiner, the arguments
in support of the rejections and the evidence of anticipation
and obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as support for the
rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, Appellants’ arguments
set forth in the Briefs along with the Examiner’s rationale in
support of the rejections and arguments in rebuttal set forth
in the Examiner’s Answers.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
us, that the disclosure in this application describes the
claimed invention in a manner which complies with the
requirements of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112. We
are also of the view that the claims particularly point out
the invention in a manner which complies with 35 U.S.C. § 112,
Reply Brief was filed June 3, 1996, which was entered as a
result of a favorable decision on petition filed under 37 CFR
§ 1.181. A Supplemental Examiner’s Answer was submitted on
January 17, 1997.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007