Ex parte HICKS - Page 3




              Appeal No. 1997-4381                                                                                       
              Application 08/440,734                                                                                     



                     The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:                                           
              Hettinga et al. (Hettinga)                4,379,170                    Apr.   5, 1983                      
              Payne et al. (Payne)               5,172,193                    Dec. 15, 1992                              

              Nordstrom et al. (Nordstrom), “Prevention of Bacteriophage Adsorption to Staphylococcus                    
              aureus by Immunoglobulin G,” Journal of Virology, Vol. 14, No. 2,                                          
              pp. 203-206 (1974)                                                                                         

                                                       OPINION                                                           
                     In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the                 
              appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the                      
              respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner.                                        
                     Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the                   
              appellant regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the examiner's                         
              Answer (Paper No. 10, April 1, 1997) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of                   
              the rejection, and to the appellant's Brief (Paper No. 9, January 6, 1997) for the appellant's             
              arguments thereagainst.  As a consequence of our review, we make the determinations                        
              which follow.                                                                                              
                                               DECISION ON APPEAL                                                        
              Grounds of Rejection                                                                                       




                                                           3                                                             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007