Appeal No. 2000-1240
Application 09/094,067
Claims 14-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e) as being anticipated by Obara. This reference, further
in view of Stinesen, is utilized to reject claims 6, 8, 10, 12
and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Finally, claims 14 through 19
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by
Mukawa.
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellant and the
examiner, reference is made to the brief and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
Turning first to the rejection of claims 14 through 19 under
the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112, we reverse this rejection.
In response to this rejection, set forth originally in the final
rejection, appellant filed an amendment after final rejection
which was entered by the examiner in accordance with the Advisory
action mailed on May 12, 1999. As expressed at the bottom of
page 4 of the brief, appellant was of the understanding that the
entry of this amendment obviated the rejection which has not been
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007