Appeal No. 2000-2094
Application No. 08/923,369
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Lang 5,164,839 Nov. 17, 1992
Radice 5,475,498 Dec. 12, 1995
(filed Aug. 10, 1993)
Takada et al. (Takada) 5,715,104 Feb. 03, 1998
(effectively filed Oct. 03, 1990)
Claims 10-16 and 21-30 stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. As evidence of obviousness, the Examiner offers Lang in
view of Takada with respect to claims 10-16 and 21-27, and adds
Radice to the basic combination with respect to claims 28-30.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Brief (Paper No. 17) and Answer
(Paper No. 18) for the respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the
rejection advanced by the Examiner, the arguments in support of the
rejection and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by the
Examiner as support for the rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed
and taken into consideration, in reaching our decision, Appellants’
arguments set forth in the Brief along with the Examiner’s
rationale in support of the rejection and arguments in rebuttal set
forth in the Examiner’s Answer.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007