Appeal No. 2002-2305
Application No. 09/473,792
Claims 9 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Kamazawa in view of Priest.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's full commentary
regarding 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.
11, mailed May 1, 2002) for the reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to appellant's brief (Paper No. 10, filed
December 10, 2001) 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, to the declaration filed May
14, 2001,1 and to the respective positions articulated by
appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of our review, we
have made the determinations which follow.
1 Based on the comments found on page 7 of the examiner's
answer, we understand that the 12 pages of test results filed
with Paper No. 8 on October 1, 2001 have also been entered and
considered by the examiner.
44
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007