Appeal No. 98-0978
Application 08/505,650
The claimed printing process of claim 1 and the
claimed printing apparatus of claim 10 can be further
understood with reference to the appealed claims appended to
the appellant's brief.
The prior art of record relied upon by the examiner
as evidence of obviousness is:
Love 4,718,340 Jan. 12, 1988
Kanck 5,213,041 May 25, 1993
Kubokawa et al. (Kubokawa) 63-135,248 June 7, 19882
(Japanese kokai)
THE REJECTION
The examiner has rejected claims 1, 5, 9 through 11,
14, 16, 18 through 20, and 22 through 24 under 35 U.S.C. §
112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failure to
particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter
which applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 9 through 11, 14 and 24 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Kanck in view of
2Our understanding of the Japanese kokai is via an
English translation, a copy of which is attached to this
decision.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007