Appeal No. 1998-1263
Application No. 08/351,993
9. Claim 18 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Du Bois in view of Stanton.
10. Claims 19 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Du Bois in view of Fisher.
11. Claims 23 and 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Du Bois.
The full text of the examiner's eleven rejections and
response to the argument presented by appellant appears in the
supplemental examiner's answer (Paper No. 24), while the complete
statement of appellant's argument can be found in the main and
reply briefs (Paper Nos. 17 and 21).
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the issues raised in this
appeal, this panel of the Board has carefully considered
appellant's specification and claims, the applied teachings,2 and
2 In our evaluation of the applied prior art, we have
considered all of the disclosure of each document for what it
(continued...)
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007