Appeal No. 2004-1962
Application No. 09/996,415
Claims 1, 3-6, 15, and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being obvious over Spahn in view of Green, Yamazaki,
and Soden.
Claims 2, 8-14, 16, and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being obvious over Spahn in view of Green, Yamazaki and
Soden, and further in view of Tanabe and Takagi.
Claims 7 and 12-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being obvious over Spahn in view Green and Yamazaki, and further
in view of Tanabe and Takagi, and further in view of Steube.
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of unpatentability:
Takagi et al. (Takagi) 4,197,814 Apr. 15, 1980
Steube 4,233,937 Nov. 18, 1980
Soden et al. (Soden) 5,532,102 Jul. 02, 1996
Spahn 6,237,529 May 29, 2001
Yamazaki et al. (Yamazaki) 2001/0006827 Jul. 05, 2001
Tanabe et al. (Tanabe) 2001/0008121 Jul. 19, 2001
On page 4 of the brief, appellants state that claims 2-18
stand or fall with claim 1. We therefore consider claim 1 in
this appeal. 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7-8)(2004).
We have carefully reviewed appellants’ brief and reply
brief, and the examiner’s answer, and the applied references.
This review has led us to conclude that the examiner’s
rejections are well founded.
OPINION
In an effort to streamline the issues in this appeal, we
observe, on pages 4-8 of the brief and on pages 2-4 of the reply
brief, that appellants limit their arguments to the references
of Spahn in view of Soden in connection with the subject matter
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007