Appeal No. 95-3451
Application No. 08/097,588
13. The method of claim 9 wherein the introduction of
said gas substantially changes the pressure within said
chamber.
The references relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness are:
Arai 5,002,793 Mar.
26, 1991
Hansen 5,123,375 Jun. 23,
1992
(filed Oct. 20, 1990)
Claims 9 through 11, 13 through 15, 19 through 24 and 30
through 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Hansen, and claims 18 and 33 are similarly
rejected as being unpatentable over Hansen in view of Arai . 2
We refer to the Brief and to the Answer for a complete
exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed by the
appellant and the examiner concerning the above noted
rejections.
For the reasons which follow, we will sustain the
rejection of claims 9, 10, 13 through 15, 19 through 23, 30
and 31 but not the rejection of claims 11, 18, 24, 32 and 33.
2The appealed claims have been grouped and argued
separately as indicated on page 5 of the Brief.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007