Appeal No. 96-3392
Application 08/121,512
Appellants' arguments regarding claims 26, 33, and 39
(Br20, Issue V(H)) state that "[t]he subject matter in these
claims is similar to that described with regard to Claims 5,
11, and 16 ... [and] are also considered to patentably
distinguish over the applied combination of references for the
same reasons." Claims 5, 11, and 16 do not contain the same
subject matter. Appellants probably mean to refer to claims
6, 12, and 17. However, since no argument was provided with
respect to the rejection of claims 5, 11, and 16 or claims 6,
12, and 17, appellants nowhere address the merits of the
examiner's rejection. Because appellants have not argued any
error in the examiner's findings of fact or conclusions of
law, the rejection of claims 26, 33, and 39 is sustained.
Claims 28, 35, and 41 -- Kohyama and Yokoyama
Appellants' arguments regarding claims 28, 35, and 41
(Br20-21, Issue V(I)) state that "[t]he subject matter in
these claims is similar to that described with regard to
Claims 6, 12, and 17 ... [and] are considered to patentably
distinguish over the applied combination of references for the
same reasons." Claims 6, 12, and 17 do not contain the same
- 18 -
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007