Appeal No. 2004-2233
Application No. 10/100,331
(Specification, page 4, lines 1-2.)
For these reasons, we hold that the appellant has not
adequately rebutted the examiner’s prima facie case of
anticipation. Accordingly, we uphold the examiner’s rejection on
this ground.
In summary, we reverse the examiner’s rejection under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) of appealed claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, and
25 through 34 as anticipated by Masuda. We affirm, however, the
examiner’s rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) of appealed claims
1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, and 25 through 34 as anticipated by
Michels.
The decision of the examiner to reject all of the appealed
claims is therefore affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
Charles F. Warren )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007