Appeal No. 2000-0784
Application No. 08/995,507
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. 14, mailed February 11, 2000) for the
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellants'
brief (Paper No.
13, filed December 17, 1999) and reply brief (Paper No. 15,
filed April 13, 2000) 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.
With regard to the rejections relying on Nakamura under
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007