Ex Parte Nishimura - Page 2




             Appeal No. 2004-2330                                                              Page 2               
             Application No. 09/986,977                                                                             


                                                 BACKGROUND                                                         
                    The appellant's invention relates to a fishing reel having a reel body coated on an             
             obverse-layer side with a ground film-layer formed by a paint coat and a metal film                    
             providing a mirroring effect formed semi-transparently on an obverse-layer side of the                 
             ground film-layer.  A copy of the claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to the              
             appellant's brief.                                                                                     
                    The examiner relied upon the following prior art references of record in rejecting              
             the appealed claims:                                                                                   
             Manabe et al. (Manabe)                          4,369,225           Jan. 18, 1983                      
             Mamoru                                          11-206284           Aug.   3, 1999                     
                    (Japanese patent document)                                                                      
             Kazuya                                          2001-17040          Jan.  23, 20011                    
                    (Japanese patent document)                                                                      

                    The following rejections are before us for review.                                              
                    Claims 15 and 17-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                               
             unpatentable over Kazuya in view of Manabe.                                                            
                    Claims 15 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                     
             over Mamoru in view of Manabe.                                                                         
                    Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                   
             the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer                    

                    1 We derive our understanding of the Mamoru and Kazuya references from the computer             
             translations obtained by the USPTO, copies of which are appended hereto.  While these translations are 
             ostensibly imprecise and incomplete, we note that they constitute the evidence presented to this panel by
             the primary examiner and thus decide this appeal on the basis thereof.                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007