Appeal No. 1998-1418
Application 08/313,249
regarding the rejections, we make reference to the final
rejection (Paper No. 11, mailed April 18, 1996) and the
examiner’s answer (Paper No. 23, mailed September 16, 1997)
for the reasoning in support of the rejections, and to
appellants’ brief (Paper No.22, filed June 10, 1997) and reply
brief (Paper No. 24, mailed November 13, 1997) for the arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellants’ specification and claims, to
the applied prior art references, and to the respective positions
as set forth by the appellants and the examiner.
Before addressing the examiner’s rejections
specifically, we note that on page 6 of the brief, appellants
indicate that the “claims fall within four groups as follows:
(I) claims 1, 4, 8, 10, 11, 13-15, and 20-22; (II) claims 28, 29,
and 31-33; (III) claims 38-40; and (IV) claim 46.” We have
selected claims 1, 28, 38 and 46 for separate consideration in
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007