Appeal No. 1999-0134
Application 08/590,695
7. Claim 26 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the teachings of Aihara in view of
Mannle and further in view of Millman.
8. Claims 19 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of Aihara in view
of Mannle and further in view of Fukui.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for
the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner and the
evidence of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support
for the rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken
into consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellants’
arguments set forth in the briefs along with the examiner’s
rationale in support of the rejections and arguments in
rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record
before us, that the evidence relied upon and the level of
skill in the particular art would not have suggested to one of
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007