Appeal No. 1999-1423
Application 08/261,639
Reference cited by the merits panel:
Chin 5,256,561 Oct. 26, 1993
Grounds of Rejection
Claims 48 and 50-60 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Tzeng and
Berry.
Claims 48 and 49 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Tzeng and Berry in
further view of admissions in the specification.
Claims 48 and 57 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Tzeng and Berry in
further view of Weng.
Claims 48, 59 and 61 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Tzeng and
Berry in further view of Kondo.
DISCUSSION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given consideration to the
appellant’s specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner's
Answer for the examiner's reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the appellant's
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007