Appeal No. 1999-2660 Page 3
Application No. 08/850,313
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed
claims are:
Reiter 5,263,668 Nov. 23, 1993
Hardt et al. (Hardt) 5,020,768 Jun. 4, 1991
The following rejections are before us for review.
1. Claims 1-6, 9-14, 17 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Reiter.
2. Claims 7, 8, 15, 16, 18 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Reiter in view of Hardt.
Reference is made to the brief and reply brief (Paper Nos. 9 and 11) and the answer
(Paper No. 10) for the respective positions of the appellants and the examiner with regard to
the merits of these rejections.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the
appellants' specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the respective
positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. While we, like the examiner,
appreciate the close relationship of the applied prior art references to the appellants' invention,
for the reasons discussed below, we cannot sustain the examiner's rejections.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007