Appeal No. 1998-1069
Application No. 08/259,575
4 5
Answer, and the Supplemental Examiner's Answer for the
respective details thereof. 6
OPINION
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 54 and 56-61
under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The Examiner has failed to set forth a prima facie case.
It is the burden of the Examiner to establish why one having
4The Examiner's Answer was mailed December 11, 1996.
5The Supplemental Examiner's Answer was mailed March 30,
2001.
At section 4 of the Supplemental Examiner's Answer, the
Examiner noted that the amendment after final rejection (Paper
No. 25) was entered. This amendment added further limitations
to independent claim 54 and dependent claim 61. Appellant has
not responded to the Supplemental Examiner's Answer and has
presented no arguments as to these additional claim
limitations.
Contrary to the Examiner's assertion at section 7 of the
supplemental answer, the copy of the appealed claims contained
in the Appendix to the brief is not correct as the Examiner
has now entered the aforesaid amendment after final.
Furthermore, as this amendment canceled claim 55, the
rejection at issue can only include claims 54 and 56-61.
6The Reply Brief received February 18, 1997 was not
entered, as set forth in the Examiner's letter mailed April
22, 1997. Appellant did not petition to request entry of the
Reply Brief. Accordingly, the Reply Brief has not been
considered.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007