Appeal No. 1997-2898
Application 08/368,239
Claims 1-3, 5, 9-11, 13, 17, and 19-25 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Himelstein.
Claims 4, 6-8, 12, and 14-16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Himelstein in view of Fuller.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or the
Examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answers for 2
the details thereof.
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we will
sustain the Examiner's rejection of claims 1-3, 5, 7, 8-11,
13, 15-17 and 19-25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, but we will reverse
the rejection of claims 4, 6, 12, and 14 on appeal for the
reasons set forth infra.
At the outset, we note that Appellants have indicated on
page 5 of the brief that claims 1-25 stand or fall together,
but in addition set forth the following groups:
Group B – claims 4, 12, and 20;
Group C – claims 6 and 14;
Group D – claims 8 and 16;
Group E – claims 17-20;
Group F – claim 18.
2The Examiner mailed an Examiner's answer on February 27,
1997 and a supplemental Examiner's answer on June 30, 1999.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007