Appeal No. 2000-0953 Page 3
Application No. 08/288,418
Claims 1 to 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Koepf in view of Osterwalder and the
Admitted Prior Art.
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. 16,
mailed July 27, 1998) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 15,
filed November 4, 1997) 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, 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 anticipation rejection
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007