Appeal No. 95-0311
Application No. 07/976,846
The references relied upon by the examiner are:
Murayama et al. (Murayama) 4,241,208 Dec. 23, 1980
Ikenaga et al. (Ikenaga) 4,730,015 Mar. 8, 1989
Karrer et al. (Karrer) 2 074 564 Nov. 4, 1981
(Great Britain patent application)
In the final rejection, mailed April 16, 1993, claims 1
to 4 and 6 to 9 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being obvious over Murayama, and claims 1 to 11 were
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Murayama in view of Ikenaga and appellant's admission on page
5, lines 20 to 26 of the specification. This appeal ensued
and appellant filed his Brief (Paper No. 8). In response to
the Brief, the Examiner’s Answer (Paper No. 9) entered new
grounds of rejection, including an objection to dependent
claims 3 to 5, 10, and 11, which multiply depend from claims 1
and 2. In response to the Answer, appellant filed a Reply
Brief, including an amendment to the claims (Paper No. 10).
Thereafter, the examiner forwarded the application to the
Board. On July 16, 1998, the application was remanded to the
examiner for further action. As a result of the remand, the
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007