Appeal No. 1997-2708
Application No. 08/337,204
Sparrow 4,747,147 May 24,
1988
Kimizu 4,874,932 Oct. 17,
1989
Claims 28 through 30, 33 through 36, 70, 72 through 74,
78 through 80, 83, 84, 88 through 90, 92, 117, 141 through
146, 148 through 150, and 157 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as being anticipated by Sparrow.
Claims 31, 37, 38, 75, 91, 118, and 147 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Sparrow, with
the addition of Kimizu for claims 31, 37, and 38.
Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 19,
mailed February 4, 1997) for the examiner's complete reasoning
in support of the rejections, and to appellants' Brief (Paper
No. 17, filed November 22, 1996) and Supplemental Brief (Paper
No. 18, filed December 10, 1996) for appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the claims, the applied
prior art references, and the respective positions articulated
by appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of our
review, we will reverse both the anticipation rejection of
claims 28 through 30, 33 through 36, 70, 72 through 74, 78
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007