Appeal No. 2001-0546
Application 07/842,722
March 24, 2003, and docketed at the Board on June 9, 2003,
requesting rehearing of our decision (Paper No. 54) (pages
referred to as "D__") entered January 23, 2003. In that
decision, we: (1) sustained the rejection of claims 18, 26-28,
31, and 32 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, lack of
written description; (2) reversed the rejection of claims 1, 13,
and 29 under § 103(a) over Kugimiya and Lee; (3) reversed the
rejection of claim 30 under § 103(a) over Kugimiya, Lee, and
Yamada; (4) sustained the rejection of claims 26-28, 31, and 32
under § 103(a) over Nishino and Lee; (5) sustained the rejection
of claim 18 under § 103(a) over Nishino, Lee, and Eda; and
(6) entered a new ground of rejection as to claims 1, 13, and 29
under § 103(a) over Nishino, pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b),
The request for rehearing is DENIED.
OPINION
"The request for rehearing must state with particularity the
points believed to have been misapprehended or overlooked in
rendering the decision and also state all other grounds upon
which rehearing is sought." 37 CFR § 1.197(b) (2002). It is not
clear from the request for rehearing what points appellants think
were misapprehended or overlooked in our decision. Since the
request for rehearing is short, we address each paragraph.
The first three paragraphs seem to be just introductory or
background statements that require no response.
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007