Appeal No. 1998-0215
Application No. 08/052,671
1) Claims 1 through 3 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by or, in the alternative, 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the disclosure of Pedlow;
2) Claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
the disclosure of Pedlow;
3) Claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
the combined disclosures of Pedlow and Mater;
4) Claims 1 through 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the disclosure of Wade;
5) Claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
the combined disclosures of Wade and Mater;
6) Claims 1 and 3 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by or, in the alternative, 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the disclosure of Yoshimi; and
7) Claims 4 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the disclosure of Yoshimi.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the claims, specification, and
18). The examiner has also withdrawn the § 102 rejection of
claims 1 and 3 as anticipated by Yoshimi newly set forth in
the Answer. See page 2 of the first Supplemental Examiner’s
Answer.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007