Appeal No. 1998-1469
Application No. 08/351,045
Claims 1, 3-7, 9, 16-19, 26 and 28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Ichijo.
Claims 2, 8, 10-15, 20 and 22-25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Ichijo in view of Yokogawa.
Claims 21, 27 and 29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ichijo
in view of Taylor.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the appellant
regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper No. 32, mailed
February 8, 1996), the examiner's answer (Paper No. 40, mailed November 14, 1996) and the
supplemental examiner's answer (Paper No. 45, mailed March 31, 1997) for the examiner's reasoning
in support of the rejections, and to the appellant's brief (Paper No. 39, filed August 8, 1996), reply
brief (Paper No. 43, filed January 14, 1997), supplemental reply brief (Paper No. 46, filed June 2,
1997) and the second supplemental reply brief (Paper No. 48, filed September 10, 1997) for the
appellant's arguments thereagainst.
The examiner’s answer set forth a new ground of rejection in which claims 1-29 were rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph. In response to the new ground of rejection, appellant filed
an amendment (Paper No. 41, filed January 14, 1997). In a communication from
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007