Appeal No. 96-0661
Application 08/189,833
reply brief (Paper No. 15, filed July 12, 1995) for
appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellant's specification and claims,
to the applied prior art references, and to the respective
positions articulated by appellant and the examiner. As a
consequence of this review, we have made the determinations
which follow.
Looking first to independent claim 1, it is the
examiner’s position that Fukuda (Japanese ‘122) or Nitta
(Japanese ‘623) discloses the claimed invention except for the
particular composition of the heating element required in
appellant’s claim 1 on appeal. Appellant has not indicated or
urged otherwise and, in fact, references these two documents
on pages 1 and 2 of the specification as being representative
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007