Appeal No. 1997-3403
Application No. 08/032,889
The Examiner relies on the following references:
Smith 4,624,514 Nov. 25,
1986
Rodrigues et al. (Rodrigues) 5,101,079 Mar. 31,
1992
Claims 1 to 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being obvious over Smith and Rodrigues.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for 2
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have considered the rejections advanced by the
Examiner and the supporting arguments. We have, likewise,
reviewed the Appellants’ arguments set forth in the briefs.
We affirm-in-part.
In our analysis, we are guided by the general proposition
that in an appeal involving a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103,
2A first reply brief was filed as paper no. 14 and a
second reply brief was filed as paper no. 16. Both were
denied entry, see paper nos. 15 and 17. However, the second
was entered after a petition to the Commissioner, see paper
no. 20.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007