Appeal No. 2002-1924 Page 15
Application No. 09/102,342
Lastly, the appellants argument that the rejection ignores many features recited
in each of the claims under appeal is unconvincing for the rational expressed in our
treatment supra of the anticipated rejection based on Sullivan.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 18
to 29 and 33 to 37 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Shama in view of
Horiuchi is affirmed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 18 to 23, 28 and 29
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Sullivan is affirmed; the decision of
the examiner to reject claims 27 and 30 to 32 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
anticipated by Sullivan is reversed; the decision of the examiner to reject claims 18 to
29 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Horiuchi is affirmed; and the decision of the examiner to
reject claims 18 to 29 and 33 to 37 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Shama in view of Horiuchi is affirmed.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007