Appeal No. 2000-0286 Page 4
Application No. 08/704,031
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper
No. 12, mailed April 23, 1998) and the answer (Paper No. 24,
mailed April 9, 1999) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 23,
filed February 23, 1999) and reply brief (Paper No. 25, filed
June 9, 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 written description rejection
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 8 to 12 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007