Appeal No. 2004-1912
Application No. 09/808,584
Claims 1-5 and 9-16, 18-35 and 57 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Schäfer ‘256.
Claims 1, 3, 9, 11-13, 16, 18-20, 25-27, 32-35, and 57
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by
Schäfer ‘620.
Claims 1, 3, 9-16, and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Knain.
Claims 1 and 9, stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Schrauwers.1
Claims 1, 9 and 57 stand rejected under 35 U.C.S. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Shiraishi.
Claims 1, 10, and 57 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Rebentisch.
Claims 6-8 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being obvious over Schäfer ‘256.
Claim 33 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Schäfer ‘256 in view of Kirk-Othmer.
Claims 2 and 4-7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being obvious over Schäfer ‘620.
Claims 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being obvious over Knain.
Claims 2, 3, 6, and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § as
being obvious over Schrauwers.
Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being over
over Shiraishi.
1 We observe that this rejection does not include a rejection of claim
12. On page 2 of the final Office action (Paper No. 9), claim 12 was
included in this rejection. On page 2 of the brief, appellants list
claim 12 as one of the rejected claims in this rejection. We assume
the examiner has thus withdrawn the rejection of claim 12 in the
rejection because claim 12 is not rejected in the answer.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007