Appeal No. 1998-0870
Application No. 08/325,015
The examiner has relied upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Armes et al. (Armes) 4,959,162 Sept. 25, 1990
Wessling et al. (Wessling) 5,476,612 Dec. 19, 1995
(Filed Nov. 9, 1992)
De Boer 533,256 Mar. 24, 1993
(Published European Patent Application)
Kinoshita et al. (Kinoshita) 585,819 Mar.
9, 1994
(Published European Patent Application)
The issue presented before us is whether the examiner
correctly rejected claims 1 through 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the combined teachings of Kinoshita, De
Boer, Armes and Wessling (Answer, page 4). Based on our
review of the entire record, we affirm the examiner’s
rejection essentially for the reasons stated in the Answer.
We add the following comments for emphasis and completeness.
OPINION
We begin our consideration of the issue before us by
determining the scope of any contested claimed subject matter.
the aforementioned Amendment.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007