Appeal No. 2004-1641
Application No. 09/764,388
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 5, 6, 20-23 and 25
as being obvious over Kiyohara in view of Garland and
further in view of Simpson
We refer to the examiner’s rejection as set forth on page 4
of the answer, and agree with the prima facie case presented
therein.
Appellants’ position regarding this rejection is set forth
on pages 5-6 of the brief. Appellants refer to the same
arguments presented with regard to the previously discussed
rejection. Hence, for the same reasons, discussed, supra, we are
not convinced by such arguments, and affirm this rejection also.
We note that appellants discuss the examiner’s comments
regarding that Kiyohara teaches a scanner for scanning an image.
However, we find this discussion is not pertinent to the
rejection at hand, as this teaching, as pointed by the examiner
on page 6 of the answer, is simply a teaching of an extra
limitation.
In view of the above, we, therefore, also affirm the 35
U.S.C. §103 rejection of claims 5, 6, 2-23 and 25 as being
obvious over Kiyohara in view of Garland and further in view of
Simpson.
III. Conclusion
Each of the rejections is affirmed.
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007