Appeal No. 1999-1539
Application 08/584,118
Claims 1 to 9, 13 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 as being anticipated by Sundaram.
Claims 1 to 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as
being anticipated by Canon.
Claims 4 to 9, 13 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Canon in view of Sundaram.
Rather than repeat verbatim the arguments of appellants
and the examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the 3
answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have considered the rejections advanced by the
examiner
and the supporting arguments. We have, likewise, reviewed the
appellants’ arguments set forth in the briefs.
We reverse.
REJECTION UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 102
A prior art reference anticipates the subject of a claim
when the reference discloses every feature of the claimed
invention, either explicitly or inherently (see Hazani v.
3A reply brief was filed as Paper No. 15. The examiner
noted its entry, see Paper No. 16.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007