Appeal No. 2004-0664
Application 09/756,683
THE PRIOR ART
The references relied on by the examiner to support the final rejection are:
Shofner et al. (Shofner) 5,544,090 Aug. 6, 1996
Leifeld 5,692,267 Dec. 2, 1997
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1 through 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Leifeld.
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Shofner.
Attention is directed to the main and reply briefs (Paper Nos. 13 and 16) and to
the answer (Paper No. 15) for the respective positions of the appellant and the
examiner regarding the merits of these rejections.1
DISCUSSION
I. Preliminary matter
The appellant raises as a issue in the appeal the decision of the examiner to
make the Office action appealed from “final” (see pages 10 and 11 in the main brief).
As this issue is not directly connected with the merits of any rejection of claims, it is
1 In the final rejection (Paper No. 10), the statement of the rejection of claims 13
and 14 refers to Leifeld and U.S. Patent No. 5,014,395 to Staheli et al. (Staheli). The
examiner has since indicated (see page 16 in the answer) that the citation of Staheli
was accidental and that Staheli is not in fact relied on to support the rejection.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007