Appeal No. 1999-2790
Application No. 08/794,530
Claims 1 and 5 through 9 additionally stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Wall in view
of Kreamer.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we refer to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 42,
mailed March 29, 1999) and to appellant's brief (Paper No. 41,
filed February 25, 1999) for a full exposition thereof.
OPINION
Having carefully reviewed the anticipation and
obviousness issues raised in this appeal in light of the
record before us, we have come to the conclusion that the
examiner's rejections of the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) and 35 U.S.C. § 103 will not be sustained. Our
reasoning in support of these determinations follows.
Regarding the examiner's rejection of claims 1, 5 through
10, 12 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) based on Wall,
appellant has invoked 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph, by
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007