Appeal No. 96-3234
Application 08/184,446
disclosure. Claims 1 through 4 and 7 through 12 are rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Ozaki.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellant or the
Examiner, we make references to the briefs and the answer for 2
the details thereof.
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we
do not agree with the Examiner that Appellant's specification
is properly objected to under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first para-
graph, for failing to provide an enabling disclosure, and
claims 1 through 13 are properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
112, first paragraph. In addition, we do not agree with the
Examiner that claims 1 through 4 and 7 through 12 are properly
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Ozaki.
2Appellant filed an appeal brief on February 9, 1996.
Appellant filed a reply brief on May 20, 1996. The Examiner
responded to the reply brief on December 24, 1996, thereby
entering the reply brief into the record.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007