Appeal No. 1998-0498
Application No. 08/541,471
collective teachings and suggestions of Tompkins, Laycock and
Hosono, further in view of Nakayama and Hayden.1
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellants and
the examiner, reference is made to the brief and the answer
for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
Turning initially to the rejection of claims 11 and 16 as
being obvious over the collective teachings of Thompkins and
Laycock, and the separately stated rejection of claim 14 in
view of the further teachings provided by Nakayama, we sustain
both of these rejections as to these three claims. We do this
simply because the brief submitted by appellants does not
traverse the rejections of these claims, thus apparently
confirming the merits of them.
On the other hand, we reverse the rejections of all other
claims on appeal under 35 USC § 103. At the beginning of page
1To the extent the examiner rejects all claims on appeal
under 35 § USC 103, in light of the collective teachings of
Tompkins in view of Laycock and Hosono at pages 2 and 6 of the
answer, this will constitute a new ground of rejection as to
claims 11, 14 and 16. These views of the examiner at these
pages appear to be an inaccurate summary of the rejections set
forth in the final rejection which are set forth individually
and correctly in the remaining parts of the answer.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007