Appeal No. 98-2126 Page 3
Application No. 08/490,180
point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the
appellant regards as the invention.
Claims 34 and 45-47 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as being unpatentable over Keiji.
The rejections are explained on page 5 of the answer. The
arguments of the appellant and examiner in support of their
respective positions may be found on pages 9-22 of the brief,
pages 1-13 of the reply brief and pages 6-10 of the answer.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the appellant's invention as
described in the specification, the appealed claims, the prior
art applied by the examiner and the respective positions
advanced by the appellant in the brief and reply brief, and by
the examiner in the answer. As a consequence of this review,
we will (1) sustain the rejection of claim 42 under 35 U.S.C. §
112, second paragraph, (2) reverse the rejection of claims 34
and 45-47 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a), and (3) enter a new rejection of claims 45-47 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007