Appeal No. 2003-0774
Application 09/841,764
5. Claim 49 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over the teachings of Rapeli in view of Fujino
and Chung.
6. Claim 50 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over the teachings of Rapeli in view of
Fujino, Chung and Mano.
7. Claim 51 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over the teachings of Rapeli in view of Caire.
8. Claims 52 and 53 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over the teachings of Rapeli in
view of Mano.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner and the evidence
of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the
rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellants’
arguments set forth in the briefs along with the examiner’s
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007