Ex parte GRABHORN - Page 4




          Appeal No. 1999-2446                                       Page 4           
          Application No. 08/705,592                                                  


          35 U.S.C.  112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for                  
          failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the                  
          subject matter which the appellant regards as the invention.                


               Claims 6, 7, 9 to 17 and 19 to 25 stand rejected under                 
          35 U.S.C.  103 as being unpatentable over Stacy or Scott.                  


               Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced              
          by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted                 
          rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 10,                  
          mailed June 23, 1998) for the examiner's complete reasoning in              
          support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 9,                   
          filed April 23, 1998) and reply brief (Paper No. 11, filed                  
          August 26, 1998) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.                


                                       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                   









Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007