Appeal No. 2001-1387
Application No. 08/715,210
The items relied on by the appellants as evidence of non-
obviousness are:
The 37 CFR § 1.132 Declaration of Anatoly Verdel filed July
15, 1999 (Paper No. 17).
The Supplemental 37 CFR § 1.132 Declaration of Anatoly Verdel
filed December 13, 1999 (Paper No. 30).
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1 through 5, 14 and 16 through 19 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Unipac in
view of Helms.
Claims 9 through 12 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Unipac in view of Helms
and Finkelstein.
Claims 1 through 8, 13, 16, 17 and 19 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Peeters in
view of Helms.
Attention is directed to the appellants’ main and reply
briefs (Paper Nos. 36 and 38) and to the examiner’s final
rejection and answer (Paper Nos. 31 and 37) for the respective
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007