Ex parte SUZUKI et al. - Page 3




                 Appeal No. 1999-2087                                                                                                                   
                 Application No. 08/595,449                                                                                                             


                 (Japanese Patent)                                                                                                                      

                          The appealed claims stand finally rejected under 35                                                                           
                 U.S.C.                                                                                                                                 
                 § 103(a) on the following grounds:                                                                                                     
                          I. Claims 1, 3 through 5, 17 and 19, unpatentable over                                                                        
                 Murphy in view of JA 60-7995.                                                                                                          
                          II. Claims 17 and 19, unpatentable over Davidson in view                                                                      
                 of Goldenfeld.                                                                                                                         
                          The full text of the examiner's rejections and response                                                                       
                 to the arguments presented by the appellants appears in the                                                                            
                 answer, while the complete statement of the appellants’                                                                                
                 arguments can be found in the brief.                                                                                                   
                                                                     OPINION                                                                            
                          In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given                                                                        
                 careful consideration to the appellants’ specification and                                                                             
                 claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the                                                                                
                 respective positions articulated by the appellants and the                                                                             


                          1(...continued)                                                                                                               
                 translation is attached for the appellants’ convenience.  Any                                                                          
                 reference in this decision to JA 60-7995 by page is to this                                                                            
                 translation.                                                                                                                           
                                                                         -3-3                                                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007