Appeal No. 2006-1275 Παγε 2
Application No. 10/691,954
The prior art references
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Schenkel 4,987,865 January 29, 1991
The rejections
Claims 1, 10, 12 to 14, 16 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Schenkel.
Claims 11 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Schenkel.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer
(mailed November 15, 2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to the brief (filed September 30, 2005) and reply brief (filed January 18,
2006) for the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art reference, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007