Appeal No. 2006-0621
Application No. 09/938,237
2. Claim 2 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over the teachings of Miyawaki in view of Yamanaka
and further in view of Shimoda.
3. Claims 4 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over the teachings of Miyawaki in view of
Yamanaka and further in view of Lackman.
4. Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over the teachings of Miyawaki in view of
Yamanaka and further in view of Einbinder.
5. Claims 5, 9 and 13-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over the teachings of Miyawaki in
view of Yamanaka and further in view of Cheung.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal,
the rejections advanced by the examiner and the evidence of
obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the
rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellants’
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007