Appeal No. 1997-4077
Application No. 08/441,989
The following rejections are before us for review:
(I) claims 1, 4 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Babuder in view of
Shinohara; and4
(II) claims 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Yamaji.
The full text of the examiner's rejections and the
responses to the arguments presented by appellants appear in
the final rejection (Paper No. 5), the answer (Paper No. 12)
and the supplemental answer (Paper No. 15), while the complete
statement of appellants’ arguments can be found in the main
and reply briefs (Paper Nos. 11 and 14, respectively).5
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants’ specification and
4As a result of the amendment filed May 9, 1996 (Paper No. 6), the
examiner has withdrawn the rejection of claims 1, 4 and 7 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 based on Babuder and added rejection (I)(answer, page 2). In addition,
the examiner has designated rejection (I) as a new ground (answer, page 4).
Appellants also filed a corrected brief on September 23, 1999 (Paper5
No. 19), which includes the name of the real party in interest and information
regarding related appeals and interferences.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007