Appeal No. 1999-1557
Application 08/650,397
Brief and Examiner’s Answer for the respective details1 2
thereof.
OPINION
With full consideration being given the subject
matter on appeal, the Examiner’s rejection and the arguments
of Appellant and Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we
will reverse the Examiner’s rejection of claim 6 under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Naito. We will
reverse the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12,
16-19, 22 and 23 as being obvious over Naito. We will also
reverse the Examiner’s rejection of Claims 2-4, 9, 10, 13-15,
20 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious over Naito
and Strickland.
Focusing first on Appellant’s arguments related to
claim 6, Appellant first contends that Naito fails as an
1Appellant filed a Brief on Appeal (“Brief”) on
December 3, 1998. Appellant filed a Response to Examiner’s
Answer on January 11, 1999.
2The Examiner, in response to Appellant’s Brief, filed an
Examiner's Answer on December 16, 1998.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007