Appeal No. 2000-0546
Application 08/509,228
References
The references relied on by the Examiner are as follows:
Ashida et al. (Ashida) 5,206,721 Apr. 27, 1993
Kannes 5,382,972 Jan. 17, 1995
Washino et al. (Washino) 5,625,410 Apr. 29, 1997
(filed Apr. 7, 1995)
Baker 5,686,957 Nov. 11, 1997
(filed Jan. 30, 1995)
Rejections at Issue
Claims 1, 4, 12, 14, 20 and 30 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Baker. Claims 2-3, 5-11,
13, 15-19 and 21-27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Baker and Ashida.1 Claim 28 stands rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Baker and
Washino. Claim 29 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Baker and Kannes.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or the
Examiner, we make reference to the Briefs2 and the Answer for the
respective details thereof.
1 Appellants and Examiner mistakenly include claim 14 in the
§ 103 rejection of Baker in view of Ashida. In fact, claim 14
has only been rejected under § 102 by Baker.
2 Appellants filed an appeal brief on March 4, 1999, Paper
No. 17. On July 29, 1999, Appellants filed a reply brief, Paper
No. 19, in response to the Examiner’s answer, Paper No. 18,
mailed June 8, 1999. The Examiner entered the reply brief and
mailed notification, Paper No. 20, to Appellants on August 12,
1999.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007