Appeal No. 2001-2505
Application No. 09/072,097
matter can be derived from a reading of claim 1 which appears in
the appendix of appellant’s brief.
The prior art
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner
in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Hertel et al. (Hertel) 4,836,733 Jun. 6, 1989
Poduje et al. (Poduje) 5,102,280 Apr. 7, 1992
Uehara et al (Uehara) 5,584,647 Dec. 17, 1996
Hofmeister (WO’911) WO 94/23911 Oct. 27, 1994
(International Application published under the PCT)
The rejections
Claims 1, 2, 10 and 16 and 23 to 26 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by or in the alternative
obvious in view of Uehara.
Claims 3, 7, 11 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Uehara as applied to claims 1 and 2 above
and further in view of Poduje.
Claims 7, 8, 15 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Uehara as applied to claim 1 above, and
further in view of Hertel.
Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Uehara in view WO 94/23911.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007