Appeal No. 1999-2507
Application No. 08/967,367
Further details of this appealed subject matter are recited in
illustrative claims 9 and 14, which are reproduced from the
application and are appended to this decision.
The examiner relies on the following prior art references as
evidence of unpatentability:
Laughner 5,094,806 Mar. 10, 1992
Eichenauer et al. 5,274,032 Dec. 28, 1993
(Eichenauer) (filed Nov. 13, 1989)
Yamamoto 5,304,606 Apr. 19, 1994
(filed Mar. 15, 1993)
Brekner et al. 5,324,801 Jun. 28, 1994
(Brekner) (filed Aug. 9, 1993)
Claims 9 through 14 and 16 through 23 on appeal stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Brekner
and/or Yamamoto in view of Laughner. (Examiner’s answer, pages
4-6.) Also, claims 9 through 14 and 16 through 23 on appeal
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Eichenauer. (Id. at pages 6-7.)1
We affirm these rejections essentially for those reasons set
forth in the answer.2 Nevertheless, we add the following
1 The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as
set out in the final Office action of March 26, 1998 (paper 19)
at p. 2 has been withdrawn. (Advisory action of November 2,
1998, paper 23.)
2 The appellants submit that claims 9-13 and 16-23
constitute one group and claim 14 constitutes another group.
(Appeal brief, p. 5.) We therefore select claims 9 and 14 from
the two groups of claims, respectively, and decide this appeal as
to the examiner's grounds of rejection on the bases of these
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007