Appeal No. 1999-2209 Page 3
Application No. 09/069,355
Morris et al. (Morris) 4,686,600 Aug. 11, 1987
Foster et al. (Foster) 4,823,225 Apr. 18, 1989
Mackenzie et al. 5,546,266 Aug. 13, 1996
(Mackenzie)
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Morris in view of Mackenzie.
Claims 2-13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Morris in view of Mackenzie, and
further in view of Foster.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 9, mailed April 1, 1999) and the final rejection (Paper
No. 4, mailed October 15, 1998) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellants'
brief (Paper No. 8, filed February 25, 1999) and reply brief
(Paper No. 10, filed
May 17, 1999) for appellants' arguments thereagainst. Only
those arguments actually made by appellants have been
considered in this decision. Arguments which appellants could
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007