Appeal No. 2004-1481
Application No. 09/726,659
The following rejections are before us in this appeal:
(1) claims 10, 13, 14, 17 and 18 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as containing “new matter” (Answer,
page 4);
(2) claims 1 and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Neoh (id.);
(3) claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 8 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Neoh in view of On (Answer, page 5);
and
(4) claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Neoh or Neoh in view of On, either further in
view of DC Capacitive Sensors (Answer, page 8).3
We affirm the rejections based on section 112, ¶1, and section
103(a) essentially for the reasons stated in the Answer and those
reasons set forth below. We reverse the rejection based on section
102(b) for reasons set forth below. Accordingly, the decision of
the examiner to reject the claims on appeal is affirmed.
3All rejections of claims 14, 17 and 18 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) have been withdrawn by the examiner (Answer, page 3,
¶(6) and page 9).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007