Appeal No. 2001-1284 Page 3
Application No. 08/792,765
Claims 1 to 3, 5 to 17 and 28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Cooper in view of Augur.3
Claims 1 to 3, 5 to 23, 28 and 29 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Cooper in view of
Augur and Buddrus.4
Claims 1, 6, 11, 20 to 22 and 28 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Cooper in view of
Augur and Buddrus.5
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 29, mailed
September 29, 2000) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
3 The examiner included claims 24 to 26 in the statement of
this rejection (answer, p. 4), however, claims 24 to 26 are not
under appeal as noted on page 1 of this decision.
4 The examiner included claims 24 to 27 in the statement of
this rejection (answer, p. 5), however, claims 24 to 27 are not
under appeal as noted on page 1 of this decision.
5 The examiner included claims 24 to 26 in the statement of
this rejection (answer, p. 6), however, claims 24 to 26 are not
under appeal as noted on page 1 of this decision.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007