Appeal No. 1997-2981
Application No. 08/161,304
Claims 39 and 41 through 50 stand rejected as
alternatively anticipated under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) by Idelsohn
or under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) by Pryor.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the
respective positions of appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
At the outset, we note that the examiner has been of
little help in particularly explaining the rejections on
appeal. A mere statement that claims stand rejected “as being
clearly anticipated by” a particular reference, without any
further rationale, such as pointing out corresponding elements
between the instant claims and the applied reference, fails to
clearly make out a prima facie case of anticipation.
Nevertheless, we will sustain the rejection of claim 39
and its dependent claim 46 under both 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) and
§ 102(e). However, we will not sustain the rejections of
claims 41 through 45 and 47 through 50 under either 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) or § 102(e).
Turning first to the rejection of claim 39 under 35
U.S.C.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007