Appeal No. 1997-3969
Application No. 08/175,052
§ 103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of Akkapeddi
in view of Haines.
3. Claims 8-11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the teachings of Haines in view of
Hirsch.
4. Claims 12-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over the teachings of Akkapeddi in view
of Haines and Hirsch.
5. Claims 26-29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over the teachings of Haines in view of
Hirsch.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answer for
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner and the
evidence of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support
for the rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken
into consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellants’
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007