Appeal No. 1999-2634
Application No. 08/108,606
Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 over Evans 1 in view of
Svennerholm, and Soderlind or Gregory and Myers in further view of Evans 2.
Claim 11 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 over Evans 1 in view of
Svennerholm, and Soderlind or Gregory and Myers in further view of Evans 3.
DISCUSSION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given consideration to the
appellants' specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the noted rejection, we make reference to the examiner's
Answer for the examiner's reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the appellants'
Brief for the appellants' arguments thereagainst. As a consequence of our review, we
make the determinations which follow.
35 U.S.C. ' 103
Claims 7, 8, 10, 13-16 and 17-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 over
Evans 1 in view of Svennerholm, and Soderlind or Gregory and Myers. Claim 9
stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 over Evans 1 in view of Svennerholm, and
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007