Appeal No. 96-2884
Application No. 08/181,997
III. Claims 1, 5, 6, 9, 14, 15, 18 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
102(b) as anticipated by Okamura.
IV. Claims 1, 3, 5, 6, 8-21, 24, 26-32 and 34-40 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. 103 over Okamura.
V. Claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9, 13-25 and 33-41 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
103 over Okamura with Stephens.
After careful consideration of the rejections before us, the prior art, the
arguments presented by appellant and the examiner as well as the evidence (Example
2 in the specification), we affirm rejection II; and rejections IV and V as applied to
claims 1, 3-18, 19-26, and 28-40; and we reverse rejection I; rejection III; and rejection
IV as applied to claim 27 and rejection V as applied to claims 2 and 41.
A.
Preliminarily, we note that appellant’s brief presents arguments directed
to the primary examiner’s refusal to enter appellant’s amendment after final rejection.
This matter is not properly before us. 37 C.F.R. § 1.181. See also MPEP §§ 1002 and
1201 which indicates that such issues are petitionable matters.
B.
35 U.S.C. § 112, first and second paragraph rejections
I. Claims 5, 9, 18, 19, 34, 38 and 39 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112,
second paragraph. Appellant argues claims 5 and 9 separately from claims 18, 19, 34,
38 and 39 (Brief, page 7). We reverse this rejection.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007