Appeal No. 2003-0231 Page 3
Application No. 09/749,372
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 12 to 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Yuen in view of Official Notice and Young.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer
(Paper No. 12, mailed July 11, 2002) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support
of the rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 11, filed June 4, 2002) for the appellant's
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
The indefiniteness rejection
We sustain the rejection of claims 4 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007