Appeal No. 2004-1197
Application No. 10/041,430
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner has applied the
documents listed below:
Agelatos et al 4,944,045 Jul. 31, 1990
(Agelatos)
Saitoh 5,316,516 May 31, 1994
The following rejection is before us for review.
Claims 1 through 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Saitoh in view of Agelatos.
The full text of the examiner's rejection and response to
the argument presented by appellant appears in the answer (Paper
No. 7), while the complete statement of appellant's argument can
be found in the brief (Paper No. 6).
Appellant indicates that independent claims 1, 10, and 17
should be considered separately and should not stand or fall
together (brief, item VII). Accordingly, our focus shall be on
these three claims, and the dependent claims shall stand or fall
with their respective independent claim.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007