Appeal No. 2003-0664
Application No. 09/314,716
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Lai 5,351,129 Sep. 27, 1994
Birch et al. (Birch) 5,583,562 Dec. 10, 1996
Kostreski et al. (Kostreski) 5,734,589 Mar. 31, 1998
Kohiyama 5,867,219 Feb. 2, 1999
Gotwald 5,987,518 Nov. 16, 1999
(filed Oct. 28, 1996)
Qureshi et al. (Qureshi) 6,084,582 July 4, 2000
(filed July 2, 1997)
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Birch in view Kohiyama and Lai.
Claims 2 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Birch in view of Kohiyama, Lai and
Kostreski.
Claims 3 through 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Birch in view of Kohiyama, Lai and
Gotwald.
Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Birch in view of Kohiyama, Lai and Qureshi.
Claims 9 through 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Birch in view of Kohiyama, Lai,
Kostreski and Qureshi.
Reference is made to the briefs (paper numbers 23 and 25)
and the answer (paper number 24) for the respective positions of
the appellants and the examiner.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007