Appeal No. 1999-2799 Page 2
Application No. 08/609,381
page 2). A copy of the claims under appeal is set forth in
the appendix to the appellant's brief.
The examiner relied upon the following prior art
references of record in rejecting the appealed claims:
Christoffel 5,562,322 Oct. 8, 1996
Davies 408,954 Apr. 13, 1934
(British patent specification)
Suzuki et al. (Suzuki) JP 6270867 Sep. 27, 19941
(published unexamined Japanese patent application)
Claims 1-15 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as being unpatentable over Davies in view of
Christoffel.
Claims 16-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Davies in view of Christoffel and
Suzuki.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 17) for
the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections
An English language translation of this reference, prepared by the1
Patent and Trademark Office, is appended hereto.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007