Appeal No. 95-3208
Application 08/067,307
Fulwyler et al. (Fulwyler) 3,710,933 Jan. 16, 1973
Colombo et al. (Colombo) 4,329,052 May 11, 1982
Kamimoto2 JP 62-273431 Nov. 27, 1987
(Japanese)
Claims 1, 8 and 13 through 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 as being anticipated by Fulwyler. Claims 2 through 7 and 9
through 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpat-
entable over Fulwyler in view of Kamimoto and Colombo.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or the
Examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answer for the
details thereof.
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we agree
with the Examiner that claims 1 and 13 through 15 are properly
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and that claims 3 through 5 and 7
are properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Thus, we will
sustain the rejection of these claims but we will reverse the
rejection of remaining claims on appeal for the reasons set forth
infra.
At the outset, we note that Appellants have indicated on
page 3 of the brief that the claims do not stand or fall
together. However, on pages 4 through 6 of the brief, we note
Translation attached.2
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007