Appeal No. 97-1656 Page 3
Application No. 08/314,26
The reference relied on by the patent examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims follows
Takahashi 5,420,610 May 30, 1995 (filed Mar. 7,
1994).
Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112 as
indefinite and under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by
Takahashi. Claims 3 through 6 stand rejected under § 102(e)
as anticipated by or under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over
Takahashi. Rather than repeat the arguments of the appellant
or examiner in toto, we refer to the appeal and reply briefs
and the examiner’s answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we considered
the subject matter on appeal and the rejections and evidence
advanced by the examiner. We also considered the appellant’s
and examiner’s arguments. After considering the record before
us, it is our view that claims 1 and 2 particularly point out
and distinctly claim the subject matter the appellant regards
as his invention. It is also our view that Takahashi
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007