Appeal No. 2002-2053
Application No. 09/329,135 Page 3
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and appellants regarding the above-noted rejections,
we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 12, mailed
April 26, 2002) and the final rejection (Paper No. 7, mailed
September 20, 2001) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to appellants' brief (Paper No.
11, filed March 18, 2002) for appellants' arguments thereagainst.
Only those arguments actually made by appellants have been
considered in this decision. Arguments which appellants could
have made but chose not to make in the brief have not been
considered. See 37 CFR 1.192(a).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have carefully
considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejections advanced
by the examiner, and the evidence of anticipation relied upon by
the examiner as support for the rejections. We have, likewise,
reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching our decision,
appellants' arguments set forth in the brief along with the
examiner's rationale in support of the rejections and arguments
in rebuttal set forth in the examiner's answer.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007