Appeal No. 2003-1358
Application No. 09/963,910
As evidence of anticipation and obviousness, the examiner
has applied the documents listed below:
Van Nostrand 4,678,294 Jul. 7, 1987
do Espirito Santo 5,115,352 May 19, 1992
The following rejections are before us for review.
Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Van Nostrand.
Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Van Nostrand in view of do Espirito Santo.
The full text of the examiner’s rejections and response to
the argument presented by appellant appears in the answer (Paper
No. 10), while the complete statement of appellant’s argument can
be found in the main and reply briefs (Paper Nos. 9 and 11).
Claims 1 and 2 are grouped separately from claim 3 by
appellant (main brief, page 4). Thus, we select claims 1 and 3
for review, with claim 2 standing or falling with claim 1.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007