Appeal No. 1997-3512 Page 3
Application No. 08/482,034
Claims 19 and 21-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon Gaw in
view of Liu.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 12, mailed November 5, 1996) and the final rejection
(Paper No. 6, mailed February 29, 1996) for the examiner's
complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the
appellants’ brief (Paper No. 11, filed September 6, 1996) for
the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
Turning first to the rejection of claims 17, 18 and 20,
we reverse the stated rejection of claims 17, 18 and 20 under
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007