Ex parte NAKAMURA - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1998-0249                                                        
          Application No. 08/534,100                                                  


          appealed claims appended to appellant’s brief.  The references              
          of record relied upon by the examiner as evidence of                        
          obviousness are:                                                            
          Martens                  4,582,386                     Apr. 15,             
          1986                                                                        
          Shibano                  5,013,262                     May   7,             
          1991                                                                        
          Sugiyama                 5,017,156                     May  21,             
          1991                                                                        
          Townsend                 5,055,069                     Oct   8,             
          1991                                                                        
          Kachlic                  5,171,161                     Dec. 15,             
          1992                                                                        
          Chau                          5,190,480                     Mar             
          2, 1993                                                                     
          Kato                     2,186,748                     Aug. 19,             
          1987                                                                        
          (United Kingdom)                                                            
               Claims 19, 3, 5-9 and 11-18 stand rejected under 35                    
          U.S.C.                                                                      
          § 103 as unpatentable over Shibano in view of Martens, Kato,                
          Townsend, Kachlic, Sugiyama and Chau.  Only claim 19 is argued              
          in the brief, therefore all claims will stand or fall with the              
          independent claim 19.                                                       
                                       OPINION                                        
               We have carefully reviewed the rejection on appeal in                  
          light of the arguments of the appellant and the examiner.  As               

                                          3                                           





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007