Appeal No. 2005-1293 2
Application No. 09/453,480
jams. Independent claims 1 and 11 are representative of the subject matter on appeal,
and a copy of those claims can be found in Appendix A of appellants’ brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are:
Huston, Sr. et al. (Huston) 5,213,867 May 25, 1993
Simmons 5,569,146 Oct. 29, 1996
Wilhelm et al. (Wilhelm) 5,943,844 Aug. 31, 1999
Claims 4, 6, 7, 11 and 13 through 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Simmons in view of Huston or Wilhelm.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's statement of the above-noted rejection and
the conflicting viewpoints advanced by appellants and the examiner regarding the
rejection, we refer to the examiner’s answer (mailed September 30, 2004) for the
reasoning in support of the rejection and to the brief (filed October 20, 2003) and reply
brief (filed November 19, 2004) for appellants’ arguments to the contrary.
OPINION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007