Appeal No. 2000-0210 Page 3
Application No. 08/893,906
Claims 6 to 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Paykin in view of Marquette.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 28,
mailed July 13, 1999) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 25,
filed June 10, 1999) for the appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
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. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
The enablement rejection
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007