Appeal No. 2002-0303
Application No. 08/831,872
Kikuchi 4,853,772 Aug. 01, 1989
Nagasaki et al. (Nagasaki) 5,138,458 Aug. 11, 1992
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15, 16, 18-21, 23-26, 28, 29, 31-34, and 36-41 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi in view of Nagasaki.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 28, mailed Aug. 13, 2001) for the examiner's reasoning in support of
the rejections, and to appellants’ brief (Paper No. 26, filed Jul. 11, 2001) and reply brief
(Paper No. 30, filed Oct. 15, 2001) for appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of
our review, we make the determinations which follow.
At the outset, we note that appellants have elected to group all of the
independent claims and their dependent claims together except for dependent claims 5,
10, 15, 18, 20, 23, and 31 which will stand or fall as a second group.1 (See brief at
1 Additionally, we note that the examiner has not restated the rejection of dependent claims 5, 10,
15, 18, 20, 23, and 31 in the answer, but did not expressly withdraw the rejection and indicate allowability.
Therefore, we will address these claims as rejected in the final rejection.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007