Ex Parte Pels et al - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2003-0271                                                                  Page 2                
              Application No. 09/592,058                                                                                  


                                                    BACKGROUND                                                            
                     The appellants' invention relates to the field of electromagnetic interference, and                  
              in particular to a connector that suppresses electromagnetic interference from                              
              IEEE-1394 connectors (specification, p. 1).  A copy of the claims under appeal is set                       
              forth in the appendix to the appellants' brief.                                                             


                     The prior art reference of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                       
              appealed claims is:                                                                                         
              Weidler et al. (Weidler)                   6,033,263                    Mar. 7, 2000                        


                     Claims 1, 2, 4 to 7, 9, 10, 12 to 18 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                           
              § 102(b) as being anticipated by Weidler.                                                                   


                     Claims 3, 8, 11 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                                 
              unpatentable over Weidler.                                                                                  


                     Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                        
              the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer                        
              (Paper No. 9, mailed July 12, 2002) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of                     









Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007