Appeal No. 1997-3933
Application No. 08/193,179
as being unpatentable over Admitted Prior Art in view of van Slageren. Claims 4 and 6
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Admitted Prior Art and
van Slageren in view of Katou. Clams 11-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Admitted Prior Art and van Slageren in view of Sokolik. Claims
23-28, 35-37, 39-43 and 45-49 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Admitted Prior Art in view of Sokolik. Claims 50-59 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Admitted Prior Art in view of Hertrich.
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. 27, mailed Feb. 24, 1997) for the examiner's reasoning in support of
the rejections, and to the appellants’ brief (Paper No. 26, filed Dec. 27, 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.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007