Appeal No. 2003-0346
Application No. 09/113,925
Claims 1, 33, 39, 47, 51, 53 and 55 are representative of
the subject matter on appeal and a copy of these claims is
appended to this decision.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:
Porter et al. (Porter) 3,887,194 Jun. 03, 1975
Kihira et al. (Kihira) 4,806,849 Feb. 21, 1989
Homma et al. (Homma) 4,962,360 Oct. 09, 1990
Pletcher et al. (Pletcher) 5,071,526 Dec. 10, 1991
Tomantschger et al. (Tomantschger) 5,173,166 Dec. 22, 1992
Wolcott et al. (Wolcott) 5,346,605 Sep. 13, 1994
Kosek et al. (Kosek) 5,527,446 Jun. 18, 1996
The appealed claims stand rejected as follows:
1. Claims 1 through 11, 18, 19, 21 through 26, 33 through 36,
38 through 45, 47 through 49, 51, 53, 55 and 58 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over “Homma in view of
Tomantschger or Kosek” (Answer, page 3);
2. Claims 12 through 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable
over “Homma in view of Tomantschger or Kosek and Wolcott”
(Answer, page 4);
3. Claims 16, 17, 46 and 57 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over “Homma in view of Tomantschger or
Kosek and Kihira” (Answer, page 5); and
4. Claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
“Homma in view of Tomantschger or Kosek and Pletcher or
Porter”. (Answer, page 5).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007