Appeal No. 1997-2293
Application No. 08/089,311
Claims 5 and 8 to 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over either one of Johnston or
Koshiyouji in view of the asserted well known prior art.1
Rather than reiterate the arguments of the Appellant and
the Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs and Answers for 2
the respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejection advanced by the Examiner and the
evidence of obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as support
for the rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, Appellant’s arguments
set forth in the Briefs along with the Examiner’s rationale in
support of the rejection and arguments in rebuttal set forth
1This is a new ground of rejection set forth in the
Examiner’s Answer. In addition, in response to the
Appellant’s arguments in the Reply Brief, the Examiner
withdrew a 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, rejection of the appealed claims.
2The original Appeal Brief was filed May 21, 1996. In
response to the Examiner’s Answer dated August 13, 1996 a
Reply Brief was filed October 21, 1996 to which the Examiner
responded with a Supplemental Examiner’s Answer dated January
23, 1997.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007