Appeal No. 1998-1650 Page 4
Application No. 08/715,749
(Japan)
Claims 2, 4 to 7, 19 to 22, 24 and 25 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Wendel in
view of Murray.
Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Wendel in view of Murray and Naganawa.
Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Wendel in view of Murray and Kanamaru.
Claim 26 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Wendel in view of Murray and Sato.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the nonfinal Office action
(Paper No. 18, mailed January 7, 1997) and the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 25, mailed December 19, 1997) for the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007