Appeal No. 1999-1780
Application No. 08/651,630
The references relied upon by the examiner in support of
the rejections made in the final rejection are:
Lohrey et al. (Lohrey) 4,803,348 Feb. 7, 1989
Yehuda 5,245,163 Sept. 14, 1993
Rivalto 5,482,139 Jan. 9, 1996
Claims 28-32, 35-41, 44-47, 53 and 54, stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Lohrey.
Claim 48 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Lohrey in view of Rivalto.
Claims 33, 34, 42, 43, 49 and 50 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Lohrey in view of
Yehuda.
Reference is made to appellants’ main and reply briefs
(Paper Nos. 9 and 13) and to the examiner’s answer (Paper No.
12) for the respective positions of appellants and the examiner
regarding the merits of these rejections.
The anticipation rejection based on Lohrey
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art
reference discloses, either expressly or under the principles of
inherency, each and every element of the claimed invention. See
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007