Appeal No. 2002-1828
Application 09/424,606
Claims 12 through 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Iida ‘947.
Claims 12 through 27 additionally stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Kamura.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's full commentary with
regard to the above-noted rejections and the conflicting
viewpoints advanced by appellant and the examiner regarding those
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No.
14, mailed December 4, 2001) for the reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to appellant’s brief (Paper No. 13, filed August
7, 2001) and reply brief (Paper No. 15, filed February 20, 2002)
for the arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellant’s specification and claims, to
the applied prior art references, and to the respective positions
articulated by appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of
our review, we have made the determinations which follow.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007