Appeal No. 2001-0382
Application No. 08/861,481
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Friesen 4,873,393 Oct. 10, 1989
Newmoyer (Newmoyer ‘071) 5,493,071 Feb. 20, 1996
Newmoyer et al. (Newmoyer ‘173) 5,519,173 May 21, 1996
Brorein et al. (Brorein) 5,767,441 Jun. 16, 1998
(filed Jan. 04, 1996)
Claims 2-5 and 8 stand finally rejected as being indefinite
under the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112. Claims 1-14 and 24
stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). As evidence of
obviousness, the Examiner offers Brorein in view of Newmoyer ‘173
with respect to claims 1-3, 5-11, and 24. To this basic
combination, the Examiner separately adds Freisen with respect to
claim 4, and Newmoyer ‘071 with respect to claims 12-14.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs1 and Answer for the
respective details.
OPINION
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 prior
art rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
1 The Appeal Brief (revised) was filed October 3, 2000 (Paper No. 19).
In response to the Examiner’s Answer dated November 20, 2000 (Paper No. 20), a
Reply Brief was filed February 27, 2001 (Paper No. 21), which was acknowledged
and entered by the Examiner in the communication dated May 2, 2001 (Paper No.
23).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007