Appeal No. 2000-0085
Application No. 08/802,582
Claims 9 through 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Brandon in view of McIntyre,
Dernbach and FitzGerald.
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 examiner's
answer (Paper No. 12, mailed March 23, 1999) for the reasoning
in support of the rejections, and to appellants’ brief (Paper
No. 11, filed March 1, 1999) and reply brief (Paper No. 13,
filed May 17, 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.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007