Appeal No. 2000-0132
Application No. 08/934,791
7) The examiner’s rejection of claims 24, 44, and 45 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Hagel, Mikes and
Determann is affirmed;
8) The examiner’s rejection of claims 27, 31, 48 and 52 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the combined
disclosures of Hagel, Mikes, Porath, and Ayers is affirmed;
9) The examiner’s rejection of claims 54 and 61 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as unpatentable over the combined disclosures of
Hagel, Mikes, Ayers, and Yuki is affirmed;
10) The examiner’s rejection of claim 55 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Hagel,
Mikes, Ayers, Yuki, and Determann is affirmed; and
11) Pursuant to the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b), we made a
new ground of rejection against claim 46 under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Hagel,
Mikes, and Schaeffer.
Pursuant to the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b), we also
denominate our affirmance of the aforementioned Section
103 rejections as including new rejections inasmuch as our
rationale for affirming the aforementioned Section 103 rejections
is materially different from those set forth by the examiner.
23
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007