Appeal No. 2003-0350
Application 08/771,399
horizontal, vertical, and oblique directions from at least one of
the plurality of component signals generated by said generation
unit.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Morishita et al. (Morishita) 4,339,771 Jul. 13, 1982
Reitmeier et al. (Reitmeier) 4,621,286 Nov. 04, 1986
Nishimura et al. (Nishimura) 4,714,955 Dec. 22, 1987
Ozaki et al. (Ozaki) 4,903,122 Feb. 20, 1990
Parulski et al. (Parulski) 5,189,511 Feb. 23, 1993
Juen 5,737,015 Apr. 07, 1998
(filed Sep. 05, 1995)
Claims 1-11, 27, 31, and 35-39, all of the appealed
claims, stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The
Examiner rejects claims 1-8, 10, and 11 based on the combination
of Parulski, Ozaki, Nishimura, and Juen, and adds Morishita to
the basic combination with respect to claim 9. The Examiner’s 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 27, 31, and 35-37 is based on
the combination of Nishimura and Juen, with Reitmeier separately
added with respect to claim 38, and Ozaki separately added with
respect to claim 39.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and
the Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs1 and Answer for the
respective details.
1 The Appeal Brief was filed May 21, 2002 (Paper No. 23). In response
to the Examiner’s Answer dated July 29, 2002 (Paper No. 24), a Reply Brief was
filed September 30, 2002 (Paper No. 25), which was acknowledged and entered by
the Examiner as indicated in the communication dated November 18, 2002 (Paper
No. 27).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007