Appeal No. 96-3938
Application No. 08/288,861
Finally, claims 10 through 25 also stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Debier in view of
Minamizaki, Tang, Diehl or Kamiya.
As reflected on page 3 of the brief, certain of the
appealed claims have been separately grouped and argued, and
these certain claims will be individually treated in our
opinion which follows.
We refer to the brief and to the answer for a complete
exposition of the differing viewpoints expressed by the
appellant and the examiner concerning the above noted
rejections.
OPINION
For the reasons which follow, we will sustain the
examiner’s section 112, second paragraph, rejection of claim
20 and his section 103 rejection of claims 10 through 25 but
not the section 112, first paragraph, rejection of claims 10
through 25.
The section 112, second paragraph, rejection of claim 20
is hereby summarily affirmed in light of the appellant’s
concession of its propriety mentioned earlier in footnote 2.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007