Appeal No. 1999-1071
Application 08/453,770
being unpatentable over Kaetsu and Misura, as applied to claims
94, 41 above, and further in view of Matsuo.
IV. Claims 109 and 191 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. being
unpatentable over Kaetsu, Misura, Matsuo, and further in view of
Rips.
We note that appellants’ presentation of the above-mentioned
rejections is set forth on page 7 of the brief. We observe that
the identification of which claims are rejected under each
rejection differs from that set forth by the examiner on pages 2,
6, 7, 8, and 9 of the answer. The examiner states that claims
were added in Amendment D, which was entered upon filing of the
appeal brief. (answer, page 2). Possibly, this may be the reason
for some of the conflicting identification of rejected claims.
Because appellants have not raised any issue in connection with
the examiner’s presentation of each rejection, we are using the
examiner’s presentation of each rejection in this appeal.
We further note that the examiner included paragraph 14 on
page 26 of the answer stating that a new ground of rejection has
been set forth. We believe this is an inadvertant error because
(1) this paragraph is in direct conflict with paragraph 12 on
page 10 of the answer which states that the answer does not
contain any new grounds of rejection, and (2) appellants have not
acknowledged any new ground of rejection.
The examiner has withdrawn the 35 U.S.C. § 112 rejection.
The examiner has also withdrawn the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) or 103(a)
rejection over Kaetsu alone. (answer, page 2).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007