Ex parte ISHIZAWA et al. - Page 3




                 Appeal No. 1999-0891                                                                                     Page 3                        
                 Application No. 08/676,484                                                                                                             


                          Tsukizoe, Japanese Published Patent Application 02-                                                                           
                          209100,                                                                          Aug. 20, 1990 .        1                     
                 The examiner rejects claims 15, 20, and 24-26 under 35 U.S.C.                                                                          
                 § 103 as being obvious over Morris in view of Tsukizoe.  He                                                                            
                 also                                                                                                                                   
                 rejects claims 16-19 under § 103 as being obvious over Morris                                                                          
                 in view of Tsukizoe further in view of Frey and claim 22 under                                                                         
                 § 103 as being obvious over Morris in view of Tsukizoe further                                                                         
                 in view of Sherman.  Rather than reiterate the arguments of                                                                            
                 the appellants or examiner in toto, we refer the reader to the                                                                         
                 briefs and answer for the respective details thereof.                                                                                  


                                                                     OPINION                                                                            
                          After considering the record, we are persuaded that the                                                                       
                 examiner erred in rejecting claims 15-22 and 24-26.                                                                                    
                 Accordingly, we reverse.  We begin by considering the                                                                                  
                 examiner's rejection and the appellants' argument.                                                                                     





                          1A copy of the translation prepared by the U.S. Patent and                                                                    
                 Trademark Office is attached.  We will refer to the                                                                                    
                 translation by page number.                                                                                                            







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007