Appeal No. 1999-0478 Page 4
Application No. 08/534,106
The prior art applied by the examiner in rejecting the
claims follows:
Kuo 4,428,078 Jan. 24,
1984
Hildebrandt et al. (“Hildebrandt”)
4,774,514 Sep. 27,
1988
Kondo et al. (“Kondo”) 4,835,604 May 30,
1989
Edwards et al. (“Edwards”) 5,311,325 May 10,
1994.
Claims 1, 3, 4 and 7-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being obvious over Kondo in view of Edwards and
Hildebrandt.
Claim 5 stands rejected under § 103 as being obvious over
Kondo in view of Edwards and Hildebrandt, further in view of
Kuo. Rather than reiterate the arguments of the appellant or
examiner in toto, we refer the reader to the briefs and answer
for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007