Appeal No. 2002-1974
Application No. 09/023,953
CITED PRIOR ART
As evidence of unpatentability, the Examiner relies on the following references:
Kitzner et al. (Kitzner) 3,770,389 Oct. 30, 1973
Toh et al. (Toh) 4,220,625 Sep. 2, 1980
Nonnenmann et al. (Nonnenmann) 4,282,186 Aug. 4, 1981
Noakes et al. (Noakes) 4,397,772 Aug. 9, 1983
McMahon et al. (McMahon) 4,400,309 Aug. 23, 1983
Cyron et al. (Cyron) 4,842,954 Jun. 27, 1989
Hitachi et al. (Hitachi) 5,110,561 May 5, 1992
Arai et al. (Arai) 5,151,254 Sep. 29, 1992
Prigent et al. (Prigent) 5,386,696 Feb. 7, 1995
The Examiner has rejected claims 1, 3, 5 to 7, 9 to 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite; claims 1, 3, 5 to 7, 12, 13, 15, 18 and 19 as
unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combination of Hitachi and
Cyron; claim 9 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combination
of Hitachi and Cyron as applied to 1, 3, 5 to 7, 12, 13, 15, 18 and 19, further combined
with McMahon, Prigent and Noakes; claims 10, 11 and 14 as unpatentable under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combination of Hitachi and Cyron as applied to 1, 3,
5 to 7, 12, 13, 15, 18 and 19, further combined with Arai; claim 16 as unpatentable under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combination of Hitachi and Cyron as applied to 1,
3, 5 to 7, 12, 13, 15, 18 and 19, further combined with Toh; claim 17 as unpatentable
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combination of Hitachi and Cyron as
applied to 1, 3, 5 to 7, 12, 13, 15, 18 and 19, further combined with Nonnenmann; and
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007