Appeal No. 2001-0595
Application No. 09/079,293
proper antecedent for "said messages" in the last two clauses
of claim 6.
Claims 1 through 3, 5 and 6 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Callahan in view of
Stevens.
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Callahan in view of Stevens as applied to
claim 1 above, taken further in view of Friedel '201.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's statement of the
above-noted rejections and the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by appellant and the examiner regarding those rejections, we
refer to the answer (Paper No. 13, mailed August 1, 2000) for
the examiner's reasoning in support of the rejections and to
the brief (Paper No. 12, filed June 26, 2000) for appellant's
views to the contrary.
OPINION
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007