Appeal No. 2000-0075
Application 08/969,941
Rather than attempt to reiterate the examiner's full
commentary with regard to the above-noted rejections and the
conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and appellants
regarding the rejections, we make reference to the Office
actions mailed February 12, 1999 (Paper No. 5), June 8, 1999
(Paper No. 7) and to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 10,
mailed August 26, 1999) for the reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to appellants’ brief (Paper No. 9, filed June
17, 1999) and reply brief (Paper No. 11, filed September 7,
1999) 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 articulated by appellants and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we have made the determinations
which follow.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007