Appeal No. 95-2855
Application 08/075,338
rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Although there
are several arguments in the briefs and the answers related to
the dependent claims, we will not consider these arguments since
our decision to reverse the rejection of claims 1 and 5
necessarily means that the rejection of the dependent claims must
also be reversed.
In summary, we have determined that the original
specification does provide support for the invention now being
claimed by appellant. We have also determined that Ichinose and
the level of skill in the art would not have suggested the
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007