Appeal No. 1998-1517 Page 3
Application No. 08/685,269
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and appellant regarding the above-noted
rejection, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 20, mailed October 8, 1997) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejection, and to appellant's
brief (Paper No. 19, filed September 10, 1997) and reply brief
(Paper No. 21, filed December 8, 1997) for appellant's
arguments thereagainst. Only those arguments actually made by
appellant have been considered in this decision. Arguments
which appellant could have made but chose not to make in the
briefs have not been considered. See 37 CFR 1.192(a).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have
carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the
rejections advanced by the examiner, and the evidence of
obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the
rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, appellant's arguments
set forth in the briefs along with the examiner's rationale in
support of the rejection and arguments in rebuttal set forth
in the examiner's answer.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007