Appeal No. 2002-1219
Application No. 09/471,667
As evidence of anticipation, the examiner has relied upon
the following:
PRIOR ART FIG. 1 AND PRIOR ART FIG. 2 in appellant’s
application.
The following rejections are before us for review.
1. Claims 1 through 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112
as being incorrect in not reading on the disclosure.
2. Claims 1 through 8 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(a) as being anticipated by PRIOR ART FIGURES 1 AND 2.
The full text of the examiner’s rejections and response to
the argument presented by appellant appears in the answer (Paper
No. 14), while the complete statement of appellant’s argument can
be found in the Appeal Brief and Reply Brief (Paper Nos. 13 and
15).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007