Ex parte MATSUZAKI - Page 3




          Appeal No. 96-2576                                                          
          Application 08/148,271                                                      


               a thin film laminated battery made of a solid                          
          electrolytic film mounted on said semiconductor chip; and                   
               a power source switch incorporated in said integrated                  
          circuit for connecting said battery to said at least one power              
          receiving circuit;                                                          
               wherein said battery is previously charged by said normal              
          power source while said integrated circuit is being operated by             
          said normal power source, and during power failure, said power              
          source switch is automatically operated so that power is supplied           
          from said battery to said at least one power receiving circuit.             
          The examiner relies on the following references:                            
          Shimohigashi                  4,672,586          June 09, 1987              
          McCain                        5,153,710          Oct. 06, 1992              
          Claims 1-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  As                        
          evidence of obviousness the examiner offers McCain in view of               
          Shimohigashi.                                                               
          Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the                        
          examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the            
          respective details thereof.                                                 
          OPINION                                                                     
          We have carefully considered the subject matter on                          
          appeal, the rejection advanced by the examiner and the evidence             
          of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the               
          rejection.  We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into                      
          consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellant’s                    
          arguments set forth in the briefs along with the examiner's                 

                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007