Appeal No. 2002-0378
Application No. 08/942,264
The prior art of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed
claims is as follows:
Carroll et al. (Carroll) 5,293,310 Mar. 8, 1994
Owens et al. (Owens) 6,047,267 Apr. 4, 2000
(Filed May 14, 1992)
Claims 1-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Carroll in view of Owens.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner's
rejection (Paper No. 11, mailed Jun. 7, 2000) and the examiner's answer (Paper No. 21,
mailed Aug. 13, 2001) for the examiner's reasoning in support of the rejections, and to
appellants’ brief (Paper No. 20, filed Jun. 4, 2001) for appellants’ arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of
our review, we make the determinations which follow.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007