Appeal No. 2002-1045
Application 09/131,890
The examiner relies on the following references:
Rim et al. (Rim) 5,771,075 June 23, 1998
Suzuki 5,808,722 Sep. 15, 1998
(filed May 31, 1996)
Claims 1, 5, 12, 16, 17 and 21 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by the disclosure of Rim.
Claims 2-4, 6-11, 13-15 and 18-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. As evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Rim in
view of Suzuki.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal,
the rejections advanced by the examiner and the evidence of
anticipation and obviousness relied upon by the examiner as
support for the rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and
taken into consideration, in reaching our decision, the
appellant’s arguments set forth in the briefs along with the
examiner’s rationale in support of the rejections and arguments
in rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
us, that the evidence relied upon does not support either of the
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007