Appeal No. 2000-1164 Page 11
Application No. 08/899,176
OTHER ISSUES
In view of the above discussion and our affirmance of the
examiner’s § 103 rejection of claim 10 over the combined
teachings of Kern and Eitoku, the examiner should review the
subject matter of claims 3-5 and determine whether or not the
latter claims define patentable subject matter over the combined
teachings of Kern and Eitoku.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1, 2, 6, 8, 9
and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by Eitoku, to reject
claims 7, 13, 14, 19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Eitoku in view of the admitted prior art in the
specification (Background of the Invention, especially page 2,
lines 10-13) and to reject claims 10-12 and 16-18 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as unpatentable over Kern taken in combination with Eitoku
is affirmed. The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-6,
8, 9 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by Yamashita is
reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007