Appeal No. 2000-0209 Page 3
Application No. 08/693,985
Claims 1 and 3/1 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Snyder in view of Hayes.
Claims 2, 3/2, 5 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Snyder in view of Hayes and
Masser.
Claims 2 and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Snyder in view of Brandt.
Claims 8 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Snyder in view of Hayes and Baxter.
Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Snyder in view of Hayes and Raidel.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper
No. 10, mailed November 3, 1998) and the answer (Paper No. 14,
mailed June 2, 1999) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007