Appeal No. 1998-1548 Page 12
Application No. 08/660,304
Accordingly, we find that the examiner has failed to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to
the claimed invention. The rejection of claims 1-8, 11-17, 19
and 21-22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is therefore reversed.
With respect to dependent claims 9-10, 18, and 20,
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over the
APA, Oka, and Tominaga, and further in view of Kitakata, we
find that Kitakata does not overcome the deficiencies of the
basic combination of the APA, Oka, and Tominaga. Accordingly,
the rejection of claims 9-10, 18, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) is therefore reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007