Appeal No. 2003-1119
Application 09/756,588
Rather than attempt to reiterate the examiner's full
commentary with regard to the above-noted rejections and the
conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and appellant
regarding the rejections, we make reference to the final
rejection (Paper No. 4, mailed August 27, 2001) and the
examiner's answer (Paper No. 7, mailed February 20, 2002) for the
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellant’s brief
(Paper No. 6, filed December 27, 2001) for the arguments
thereagainst.
On page 4 of the brief, appellant has indicated that claims
1 through 4 form “a first group of claims that can stand or fall
together,” while claims 5 through 8 form “a second group claims
that stand or fall together.”
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellant’s specification and claims, to
the applied prior art references, and to the respective positions
articulated by appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007