Appeal No. 2004-0636
Application No. 09/045,041
Claims 9 through 12, 14 through 18, 20 through 24, 26
through 30, 32 through 36, and 38 through 42, and 44 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by
Chakrabarti.1
Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 33,
mailed August 12, 2003) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to appellant's Brief (Paper
No. 31, filed May 22, 2003) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 34, filed
October 14, 2003) for appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the claims, the applied prior
art references, and the respective positions articulated by
appellant and the examiner. As a consequence of our review, we
will reverse the anticipation rejection of claims 9 through 12,
14 through 18, 20 through 24, 26 through 30, 32 through 36, and
38 through 42, and 44. We also will enter a new ground of
rejection under 35 U.S.C § 112, second paragraph, for claims 9
through 12, 14 through 18, 20 through 24, 26 through 30, 32
1 On pages 2-3 of the Answer, the examiner indicates that the
rejections over Yokomizo, Filseth, Shinsha, Hachiya, Wang, and Kuehlmann have
been withdrawn.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007