Appeal No. 2001-0813 Page 8
Application No. 08/825,994
In summary, we have not sustained the examiner’s rejection of independent
claims 1 and 19 on appeal. Therefore, we also do not sustain the examiner’s rejection
of dependent claims 2-5 and 16-18. Although the remaining dependent claims are
rejected based on Watanabe and additional teachings of Filion, Cummings, Ito and/or
Inoue, none of these additional references overcome the deficiencies of Watanabe
discussed above. Therefore, we also do not sustain the examiner’s rejection of
dependent claims 6-15 and 20. Accordingly, the decision of the examiner rejecting
claims 1-20 is reversed.
REVERSED
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JERRY SMITH ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
MICHAEL R. FLEMING )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007