Appeal No. 2001-0255
Application 08/733,567
1048, 1052, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976). 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 and are deemed to be waived
by appellant [see 37 CFR § 1.192(a)].
Claim 5 is rejected based on Jung taken alone. Claims 6-
11 are rejected based on Jung in view of Sugimoto. Since each of
these rejections relies on the examiner’s improper interpretation
of the disclosure of Jung, the rejections fail to set forth a
prima facie case of obviousness. We note that the additional
teachings of Sugimoto do not overcome the basic deficiencies in
Jung discussed above. Since the examiner has not established a
prima facie case of obviousness, we do not sustain the rejection
of claims 5-11.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007