Appeal No. 1998-2045
Application 08/402,374
The examiner relies on the following references:
Asars et al. (Asars) 4,112,333 Sep. 05, 1978
Morozumi 4,582,395 Apr. 15, 1986
Mano et al. (Mano) 5,124,768 June 23, 1992
Holmberg et al. (Holmberg) 2,067,353 July 22, 1981
(UK Patent Application)
Togashi 2,070,857 Sep. 09, 1981
(UK Patent Application)
The following rejections are on appeal before us:
1. Claims 23-32 stand rejected as unpatentable under the
judicially established doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting over the claims of Mano.
2. Claim 32 stands rejected as unpatentable under the
judicially established doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting over the claims of Mano considered further with
Holmberg.
3. Claims 23-29 and 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of Morozumi
considered with Togashi and Asars.
4. Claims 30 and 31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of Morozumi
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007