Appeal No. 2002-0177
Application No. 09/325,835
The references relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
unpatentability are:
Rose et al. (Rose) 4,792,378 Dec. 20, 1988
Vukelic 5,268,034 Dec. 07, 1993
Murakami et al. (Murakami) 5,728,223 Mar. 17, 1998
Japanese Publication (Ogi) JP57-38721 Mar. 02, 1982
Claims 1-10 and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over appellant’s admitted prior art in view
of Vukelic.
Claim 11 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over appellant’s admitted prior art in view of
Vukelic and further in view of Murakami.
Claims 12 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over appellant’s admitted prior art in view
of Vukelic and further in view of Ogi.
Claim 17 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over appellant’s admitted prior art in view of
Vukelic and Ogi, and further view of Rose.
As indicated on page 5 of the brief, the claims on appeal
will stand or fall with each aforementioned rejection.
Therefore, we consider claims 1, 11, 12, 14, and 17. 37 CFR
§ 1.192 (c)(7)(8)(2000).
OPINION
For the reasons set forth below, we will sustain some of
the afore-noted rejections, but we will also reverse some of the
above-noted rejections.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007