Ex parte TELFORD et al. - Page 3




              Appeal No. 1996-0200                                                                                     
              Application 08/119,444                                                                                   




                     The references relied upon by the examiner are:                                                   
              Chen et al. (Chen)                        4,481,084            Nov.  6, 1984                             
              Quartarone                                5,104,514            Apr. 14, 1992                             
              Arai et al. (Arai)                        5,203,958            Apr. 20, 1993                             
              Ball  et al. (Ball)                       5,220,140            Jun. 15, 1993                             
              Dr. E. Lichtenberger-Bajza (Bajza), "Rapid Anodizing of Aluminium in Mixed Oxalic-Formic                 
              Acid Baths," 342-348 (October 1962).                                                                     
                     The rejections before us are:                                                                     
                     1.  Claims 1-21 and 32-44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated                  
              by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Chen.                              
                     2.  Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Chen as in                 
              1. and further in view of Quartarone.                                                                    
                     3.  Claims 3 and 7-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over                   
              Chen as in 1. and further in view of Bajza.                                                              
                     4.  Claims 14-20 and 32-42 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable                   
              over Chen and Bajza.                                                                                     
                     5.  Claims 22-31 and 45-48 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable                   
              over the combination of Ball and Chen,.                                                                  
                     6.  Claims 23-28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Ball                   
              and Chen as in 5. further in view of Bajza.                                                              
                     7.  Claims 22-31 and 45-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable                     
              over the combination of Arai and Chen.                                                                   
                     8.  Claim 23-28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Arai                    
              and Chen as in 7. further in view of Bajza.                                                              


                                                          3                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007