Appeal No. 1996-2246
Application No. 08/052,910
Jonkers et al. (Jonkers) 5,081,065 Jan.
14,
1992
Claims 1, 2, 6, and 8 stand finally rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ogura in view of
Komatsu, Ueno, and Henry. Claims 7 and 9 stand finally
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Ogura in view of Komatsu, Ueno, and Henry and further in view
of Ishii. Claim 10 stands finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Ogura in view of Komatsu, Ueno,
Henry, and Ishii and further in view of Jonkers and Chan.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Brief and Answer for the 2
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the Examiner and the
2The Reply Brief filed May 16, 1995 was considered by the
Examiner as not being limited to new points of arguments or to
new grounds of rejection and was not entered. Accordingly,
the arguments in such Reply Brief have not been considered in
this appeal.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007