Ex parte NILSSEN - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1997-3924                                                        
          Application No. 08/571,634                                                  


          level which would have prevailed in the absence of said                     
          internal feedback effect.                                                   
               The prior art references of record relied upon by the                  
          examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:                              
          Elms                          3,733,541                     May             
          15, 1973                                                                    
          Perper                   4,005,335                     Jan. 25,             
          1977                                                                        
          Fukuda                   4,298,822                     Nov. 03,             
          1981                                                                        
                                                  (filed May  23, 1979)               
          Young                    4,337,414                     Jun. 29,             
          1982                                                                        
                                                  (filed Nov. 26, 1979)               
               Claims 17 through 22, and 26 through 32 stand rejected                 
          under 35 U.S.C.  103 as being unpatentable over Perper in                  
          view of Elms.                                                               
               Claims 23 through 25 and 33 stand rejected under 35                    
          U.S.C.                                                                      
           103 as being unpatentable over Perper in view of Elms,                    
          Fukuda, and Young.                                                          
               Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 16,              
          mailed May 20, 1997) for the examiner's complete reasoning in               
          support of the rejections, and to appellant's Brief (Paper No.              
          17, filed May 7, 1997) for appellant's arguments thereagainst.              
                                       OPINION                                        
                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007