Appeal No. 1998-3402 Page 3
Application No. 08/190,929
Claims 4 and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to
particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter
which the appellants regard as the invention.
Claims 1 to 5, 9, 13 to 15, 18 and 19 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hay or Brooks
in view of Mattern, Gablin and De Gregorio.
Claims 6 to 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Hay or Brooks in view of Mattern,
Gablin and De Gregorio as applied to claim 1 above, and
further in view of Nguyen.
Claims 10 to 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Hay or Brooks in view of Mattern,
Gablin and De Gregorio as applied to claim 1 above, and
further in view of Earth Resources Corporation.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007