Appeal No. 1999-2122
Application No. 08/564,659
The references relied upon by the Examiner as evidence of
obviousness are:
Rainey 4,100,055 July 11, 1978
Kiyota et al. (Kiyota) 4,547,279 Oct. 15, 1985
Dietrich et al. (Dietrich ‘842) 4,572,842 Feb. 25, 1986
Ross 4,849,081 July 18, 1989
Scherer et al. (Scherer) 4,931,169 June 5, 1990
Dietrich et al. (Dietrich ‘576) 4,946,576 Aug. 7, 1990
Hurwitt et al. (Hurwitt ‘605) 4,957,605 Sep. 18, 1990
Wirz 4,988,422 Jan. 29, 1991
Hurwitt et al. (Hurwitt ‘772) 5,080,772 Jan. 14, 1992
Gilboa et al. (Gilboa) 5,108,569 Apr. 28, 1992
Clarke 5,135,634 Aug. 4, 1992
Latz et al. (Latz) 5,169,509 Dec. 8, 1992
Lueft 5,223,111 June 29, 1993
Claims 103-112, 115-127, 130, 147-152, 156, 157, 170, 1741,
176 and 178 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Kiyota, Rainey or Clarke in combination with
Hurwitt ‘605 and Hurwitt ‘772.
Claims 114, 132-134, 137-146, 158-160, 163-169, 171-173, 175,
177 and 179 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Kiyota, Rainey or Clarke in combination with
Hurwitt ‘605 and Hurwitt ‘77 2 as applied above, and further in
1 Due to an apparently inadvertent oversight on the
Examiner’s part, the statement of this rejection which appears
in the answer does not list claim 174 as being subject to the
rejection. However, as recognized by the Appellant (see page 18
of the brief) and as reflected by the final office action, it is
clear that the above noted rejection has been applied against
claim 174.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007