Appeal No. 2001-0088 Page 3
Application No. 09/271,571
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejection, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 16,
mailed April 13, 2000) for the examiner's complete reasoning
in support of the rejection, and to the brief (Paper No. 15,
filed April 3, 2000) 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.
In accordance with 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7), we have selected
claims 16 and 20 as the representative claims from the
appellants' grouping of claims 16-19, 31-33 and 35 as Group A
and claims 20-22 and 34 as Group B to decide the appeal on
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007