Appeal No. 2002-1445
Application No. 09/280,775
As evidence, the examiner has applied the documents listed
below:
Scanlon et al. 4,832,118 May 23, 1989
(Scanlon)
Dewar et al. 5,628,363 May 13, 1997
(Dewar '363)
Dewar et al. 5,655,600 Aug. 12, 1997
(Dewar '600)
Suzuki et al. 2,298,797 Dec. 11, 1990
(Suzuki)(Japan)1
The following rejections are before us for review.
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 18 through 21 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 101 as claiming the same invention (double patenting)
as that of claims 1 through 16 of Dewar '363 (U.S. Patent No.
5,628,363) and of claims 1 through 13 of Dewar '600 (U.S. Patent
No. 5,655,600).
Claims 1, 4 through 7, 9, 12 through 15, and 18 through 21
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Suzuki.
1 Our understanding of this foreign language document is
derived from a reading of a translation thereof appended to the
brief (Appendix C).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007