Appeal No. 2002-1128 Page 3
Application No. 08/668,036
The Rejections
Claims 15 through 24 and 26 through 34 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) "as being unpatentable over Platz (5,354,562) and EP 0 360 340 (AZCO) [sic]
of record by themselves or in combination, further in view of Maniar (5,482,927), Okada
(4,211,769), Hirai (4,659,696) by themselves or in combination." (Examiner's Answer,
page 3).
Claims 19, 23, and 34 further stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) "as being
unpatentable over Platz and EP by themselves or in combination, in view of Maniar
(5,482,927), Okada (4,211,769), Hirai (4,659,696) by themselves or in combination as
set forth above, further in view of Chien (5,042,975) and/or Markussen (4,946,828)."
(Examiner's Answer, page 6).
Deliberations
Our deliberations in this matter have included evaluation and review of the
following materials: (1) the instant specification, including Figures 1 through 9 and all of
the claims on appeal; (2) applicants' Appeal Brief (Paper No. 27); (3) the Examiner's
Answer (Paper No. 28); and (4) the above-cited prior art references.
On consideration of the record, including the above-listed materials, we reverse
the examiner's prior art rejections. On return of this application to the examining corps,
we recommend that the examiner reevaluate the patentability of product-by-process
claim 24 in light of the ensuing discussion.
Discussion
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007