Appeal No. 1996-1942 16
Application No. 07/977,834
The rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Sawai in view of Ozono and further in view of Wolinski is reversed.
The rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, 6 through 8, 10, 12, and 14 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ruus in view of Ozono is reversed.
The rejection of claims 21 through 26 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Ruus in view of Ozono is affirmed.
The rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Ruus in view of Ozono and further in view of Wolinski is reversed.
The rejection of claims 15 through 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Sawai is affirmed.
The rejection of claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Sawai is affirmed.
The rejection of claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Sawai in view of Ruus is affirmed.
The rejection of claims 3, 5, 11 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Ruus in view of Ozono and further in view of Dahm is reversed.
The rejection of claim 25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Ruus in view of Dahm is affirmed.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007