Appeal No. 2001-2110
Application No. 09/095,462
Claims 25-36 stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
As evidence of obviousness the Examiner offers Secor in view of
Blessinger and Jones with respect to claims 25, 28, 29, 32, and 33,
and adds Bamford to the basic combination with respect to claims
26, 27, 30, 31, and 34-36.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs1 and the Answer2 for the
respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the
rejection advanced by the Examiner, the arguments in support of the
rejection 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, Appellants’
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.
1 The Appeal Brief was filed September 5, 2000 (Paper No. 19). In
response to the Examiner’s Answer mailed September 25, 2000 (Paper No. 20), a
Reply Brief was filed November 1, 2000 (Paper No. 21), which was acknowledged
and entered by the Examiner in the communication dated January 10, 2001 (Paper
No. 22).
2 As indicated at page 3 of the Answer, a detailed statement of the
grounds of rejection appears in the Office action mailed November 22, 1999
(Paper No. 11).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007