Appeal No. 2000-1515 Page 3
Application No. 08/687,195
Fujisawa et al. (“Fujisawa”) 5,729,618 Mar. 17, 1998
(filed Mar. 17, 1995)
Suzuki et al. (“Suzuki”) 4,894,779 Jan. 16, 1990
Morgan et al. (“Morgan”) 5,689,724 Nov. 18, 1997
(filed Oct. 11, 1995).
Claims 1, 4, 9, 10, 15, 17, 21, 22 and 26 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Adachi in view of Fujisawa.
Claims 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 27, 28 and 29 stand rejected under
§ 103(a) as obvious over Adachi in view of Fujisawa further in
view of Suzuki. Claims 16, 18, and 23 stand rejected under
§ 103(a) as obvious over Adachi in view of Fujisawa further in
view of Morgan.
OPINION
After considering the record, we are persuaded that the
examiner did not err in rejecting claims 1, 4, 6-10, 12-18, 21-23
and 26-29. Accordingly, we affirm.
Rather than reiterate the positions of the examiner or
appellants in toto, we address the two points of contention
therebetween. First, the examiner asserts, "[i]t would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007