Appeal No. 2002-0728
Application No. 09/404,570
REJECTIONS
The appealed claims stand rejected as follows:
(1) Claims 1 through 5, 8 through 13 and 17 through 21 under 35
U.S.C. § 103, as unpatentable over Malhotra in view of either
Schwarz or Siddiqui, Watt, and Takazawa;
(2) Claims 6 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Malhotra in view of either Schwarz or Siddiqui, Watt, and
Takazawa and further in view of Tobias;
(3) Claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Malhotra in
view of either Schwarz or Siddiqui, Watt, and Takazawa, and
further in view of Nishizaki;
(4) Claims 14 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Malhotra in view of either Schwarz or Siddiqui, Watt, and
Takazawa, and further in view of Shacklette and Han; and
(5) Claims 23 and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
the combined disclosures of Malhotra and Watt.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the claims, specification and
applied prior art references, including all of the arguments and
evidence advanced by both the examiner and the appellant in support
of their respective positions. As a result of this review, we have
made the determinations which follow.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007