Appeal No. 2003-0123
Application No. 09/383,781
CITED PRIOR ART
As evidence of unpatentability, the Examiner relies on the following
references:
Takemura et al. (Takemura) 5,786,242 Jul. 28, 1998
Jack et al. (Jack) 5,808,350 Sep. 15, 1998
Makita et al. (Makita) 5,851,860 Dec. 22, 1998
Ohtani et al. (Ohtani) 5,854,096 Dec. 29, 1998
Tanaka et al. (Tanaka) 6,008,101 Dec. 28, 1999
Nishida 6,014,965 Jan. 18, 2000
The Examiner has rejected claims 1 to 3, and 28 as unpatentable under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combination of Makita and Ohtani; claim 27 as
unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combination of Makita,
Ohtani and Nishida; claim 4 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious
over the combination of Tanaka and Takemura; and claims 5 to 13 as unpatentable
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combination of Tanaka, Takemura
and Jack.
DISCUSSION
We have carefully reviewed the claims, specification and applied prior art,
including all of the arguments advanced by both the Examiner and Appellants in
support of their respective positions. This review leads us to conclude that the
Examiner’s § 103 rejections are not well founded. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007