Appeal No. 1999-2713 Page 4
Application No. 08/801,805
Claims 2, 4, and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over APA in view of Endo.
Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over APA in view of Endo, and further in view of
Tanaka.
Claim 5/2 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over APA in view of Endo, and "with or without"
Hisamura.
Claim 5/3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over APA in view of Endo, further in view of
Tanaka and "with or without" Hisamura.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 16, mailed March 11, 1999) and the final rejection (Paper2
No. 11, mailed May 6, 1998) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellants'
brief (Paper No. 15, filed December 23, 1998) and reply brief
2Incorporated by reference into the examiner's answer (pages 3 and 4).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007