Appeal No. 98-2126 Page 2
Application No. 08/490,180
Yoshio Miyasaka (the appellant) appeals from the final
rejection of claims 34, 42 and 45-47. Claims 23-33, 35-41, 43
and 44 stand allowed.2
We AFFIRM-IN-PART and, pursuant to our authority under the
provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 1.196(b), we will enter a new
rejection of claims 45-47 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The reference relied on by the examiner is:
Mase Keiji, Japanese Patent Abstract, Vol. 18, No. 622,
(M1712), Nov. 28, 1994. (Keiji)3
An additional reference of record relied on by this merits4
panel of the Board is:
Straub 4,067,240 Jan. 10,
1978
Claim 42 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly
2On page 2 of the answer the examiner expressly allowed
finally rejected claims 23-33, 35-41, 43 and 44.
3The practice by the examiner of relying on an abstract
of a Japanese patent, without taking the trouble to order a
complete copy of the patent together with a translation
thereof, is dubious at best.
4See the Office action mailed October 7, 1996 (Paper
No. 6).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007