Appeal No. 2002-0816
Application No. 09/442,895 Page 3
Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Shirakawa in view of Knappe, Carrier, and
Riggs.
Claims 6 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Shirakawa in view of Knappe, Carrier, and
Shiraki.
Claims 7-9 and 12-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as unpatentable over Shirakawa, in view of Knappe, Carrier,
Shiraki, and further in view of Riggs.
Claims 16 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) a
unpatentable over Shirakawa in view of Knappe, Carrier, and
further in view of Stokes.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and appellant regarding the above-noted rejections,
we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 14, mailed
December 4, 2001) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to appellant's brief (Paper No.
13, filed October 4, 2001) and reply brief (Paper No. 15, filed
January 10, 2002) for appellant's arguments thereagainst. Only
those arguments actually made by appellant have been considered
in this decision. Arguments which appellant could have made but
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007