Appeal No. 1996-2336
Application 08/270,345
U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Graiver. The claims
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as follows: claims 2 and
3 over Graiver, claims 2 and 12-19 over Graiver in view of
Xinghua, and claims 1-3 and 6-19 over Graiver in view of
Xinghua and Findlay.
OPINION
The parent of the present application previously was
before the board (appeal no. 93-2722; serial no. 07/532,471).
In that case, the board affirmed the rejections of claims 1-3
and 6-12 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by
Graiver, claims 2 and 3 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious
over Graiver, and claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
obvious over Graiver in view of Xinghua, and reversed the
rejection of claims 1-3 and 6-12 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite.
The claims in the present case differ from those in the
parent case in that both independent claims, i.e., claims 1
requirement.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007