Appeal No. 2002-2304
Application No. 09/419,157 Page 3
Wojnarowski et al. 6,046,410 Apr. 4, 2000
(Wojnarowski) (filed Aug. 24, 1998)
Claims 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Zhu.
Claims 11-14, 16, 20, 21, 23-29, 31, 33-42, 44, 49-56, 58,
63-73, 75, and 79-82 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Zhu.
Claims 3, 5, 15, 17, 30, 32, 43, 45, 57, 59, 74, and 76-78
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Zhu in view of Schuchmann and Swamy.
Claims 6, 7, 18, 19, 34, 35, 46, 47, 60, and 61 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Zhu
in view of Oberstarr.
Claims 8, 22, 48, and 62 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Wojnarowski.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and appellants regarding the above-noted rejections,
we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 24, mailed
June 21, 2002) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support
of the rejections, and to appellants' brief (Paper No. 21 , filed
February 5, 2002) and reply brief (Paper No. 25, filed August 26,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007