Ex Parte ASAI et al - Page 2



                    Appeal No. 2002-2155                                                                                                                                  
                    Application No. 09/003,276                                                                                                                            

                    personal letter for protection of privacy.  More particularly, as                                                                                     
                    indicated on page 2 of the specification, the invention includes                                                                                      
                    selecting means for selecting a confidential mode and control                                                                                         
                    means which, when the confidential mode is selected, controls the                                                                                     
                    folding means and stapling means of the system to fold a sheet in                                                                                     
                    two with the formed image inside and staple the folded sheet                                                                                          
                    along a side opposite the fold.  Independent claims 1, 10, 14 and                                                                                     
                    16 are representative of the subject matter on appeal and a copy                                                                                      
                    of those claims can be found in the Appendix to appellants'                                                                                           
                    brief.                                                                                                                                                

                    The prior art references of record relied upon by the                                                                                                 
                    examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:                                                                                                        
                    Higashio et al.                                  5,060,921                                         Oct. 29, 1991                                      
                    (Higashio)                                                                                                                                            
                    Kanou et al.                                     5,769,404                                         Jun. 23, 1998                                      
                    (Kanou)                                                                                                                                               
                    Claims 1, 3, 5 through 7 and 9 stand rejected under                                                                                                   
                    35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Kanou.                                                                                                     

                    Claims 8 and 10 through 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                                                                                             
                    § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kanou in view of Higashio.                                                                                        

                                                                                    22                                                                                    




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007