Appeal No. 97-3345
Application 08/332,936
Claim 35 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the art applied to claims 14 through
18, 33, and 34 above, further in view of Shibahara or Nemoto.
The full text of the examiner's rejections and
response to the argument presented by appellant appears in the
answer (Paper No. 16), while the complete statement of
appellant’s argument can be found in the brief (Paper No. 14).
In the brief (page 11), appellant indicates that
claims 14 through 19 stand or fall together, and that claims
33 through 35 are separately patentable. In light of the
above, we
select claim 14 for review, with claims 15 through 19 standing
or falling therewith; 37 CFR 1.192(c)(7). Accordingly, we
focus upon claims 14, 33, 34, and 35, infra.
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the obviousness issues
raised in this appeal, this panel of the board has carefully
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007