Appeal No. 1997-3842
Application No. 08/385,074
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Hirano et al. (Hirano) 4,460,923 Jul. 17,
1984
Langlais et al. (Langlais) 5,181,229 Jan. 19,
1993
(filed Dec. 28, 1989)
Claims 1 through 10, 14 through 20, 22, 24 through 26, 28
through 30, and 35 through 44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Hirano.
Claims 11 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Hirano in view of Langlais.
Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 33,
mailed January 7, 1997) for the examiner's complete reasoning
in support of the rejections, and to appellants' Brief (Paper
No. 32, filed July 3, 1996) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 34,
filed March 10, 1997) for appellants' arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the claims, the applied
prior art references, and the respective positions articulated
by appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of our
review, we will reverse the obviousness rejections of claims 1
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007