Ex parte FUJII et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 97-0203                                                          
          Application No. 08/162,893                                                  


               optical fibers for interconnecting the photocouplers in                
          the signal processing units to each other and for conducting                
          the optical information signals between signal processing                   
          units.                                                                      
               The Examiner relies on the following references:                       
          White et al. (White)          4,972,494                Nov. 20,             
          1990                                                                        
          Epstein                       5,146,357                Sep. 08,             
          1992                                                                        
               Claims 1 and 3-18 stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C.               
          § 103 as being unpatentable over White in view of Epstein.                  
          Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the                   
          Examiner, reference is made to the Brief and Answer for the                 
          respective details thereof.                                                 
                                      OPINION                                         
               We have carefully considered the subject matter on                                                                     
          appeal, the rejection advanced by the Examiner, the arguments               
          in support of the rejection 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, Appellants’ arguments set forth in the               
          Brief along with the Examiner’s rationale in support of the                 
          rejection and arguments in rebuttal set forth in the                        
          Examiner’s Answer.                                                          
                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007