Appeal No. 2002-1981
Application No. 09/316,580
4. Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Moslehi in view of See and further in view of
Sugimoto.
We reverse.
5. Claims 7-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Ochiai in view of Kameyama.
We reverse.
We also note that the examiner has raised an objection to
the specification under 35 U.S.C. § 132. See examiner's answer,
page 8-page 9. The appellants do not indicate that the Section
132 objection is an issue on appeal (see revised appeal brief,
Paper No. 13, received May 24, 2001, page 5, hereinafter “appeal
brief”), however, appellants do present arguments in response to
this objection. Appeal to the Board of Appeals may only be taken
from a decision of the examiner twice or finally rejecting
claims. See 37 CFR § 1.191. We consider the objection raised by
the examiner only to the extent that it relates to issues raised
in connection with the claims on appeal. We have concluded that
the alleged new matter does not appear to relate to these issues.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007