Appeal No. 2001-0099
Application No. 09/042,431
(1) Claims 1, 4, 8, 14 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Mesenhöller in view of
Kentish.
(2) Claims 9 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Mesenhöller in view of Kentish and
either Harrigan or Davis.
(3) Claims 11 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Mesenhöller in view of Kentish and
Inoue.
(4) Claims 13 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Mesenhöller in view of Kentish and
Glineur.
(5) Claims 5 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Mesenhöller in view of Kentish and
either Henson or Packer.
(6) Claim 21 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Mesenhöller in view of either Henson
or Packer.
Reference is made to the brief and reply brief (Paper
Nos. 12 and 15) and the answer (Paper No. 14) for the
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007