Appeal No. 2000-1520
Application No. 08/768,715 Page 3
being unpatentable over Hirai in view of Figa.
Claims 2-7 and 9-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Hirai in view of Figa and further in
view of Takahata.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and appellant regarding the above-noted rejections,
we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 17, mailed
February 1, 1999) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to appellant's brief (Paper No.
15, filed January 11, 1999) and reply brief (Paper No. 18, filed
March 31, 1999) for appellant's arguments thereagainst. Only
those arguments actually made by appellant have been considered
in this decision. Arguments which appellant could have made but
chose not to make in the brief have not been considered. See 37
CFR 1.192(a).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have carefully
considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejections advanced
by the examiner, and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by
the examiner as support for the rejections. We have, likewise,
reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching our decision,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007