Appeal No. 97-2904
Application 08/565,457
1. Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Horikawa.
2. Claims 2 and 4 through 7 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Dragstedt in view of
Horikawa.
3. Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over the combined teachings of Horikawa and
Ikeda.
4. Claims 9 and 11 through 14 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combined teachings
of Dragstedt, Horikawa and Ikeda.
Reference is made to the examiner’s answer for details of
these rejections.
Considering first the § 102(b) rejection of claim 1, it
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007