Appeal No. 2005-0181
Application No. 09/781,631
U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written
description requirement is affirmed. However, with respect to
claim 54, we reverse this rejection.
The rejection of claims 42, 44-47, and 49-51 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph (enablement) is affirmed. However, this
rejection is reversed, pro forma, with regard to claims 41, 43,
and 48.
The objection to claims 37, 54, 57, 58, 67 and 68 under
37 CFR § 1.75(c) as being of improper dependent form for failing
to further limit the subject matter of a previous claim is a
petitionable matter, and is not an appealable one.
The rejection of claims 31-33, 35, 37, 38, 42, 45, and 46
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Tang is
affirmed.
The rejection of claims 41 and 43 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)
as being anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being obvious over Tang is reversed, pro forma.
The rejection of claims 34, 36, 39, 40, 44 and 47, and 49-70
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Tang is affirmed. We
reverse this rejection with regard to claim 48, pro forma.
The rejection of claims 31, 32, 34 and 35 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e) as being anticipated by Usui is affirmed.
The rejection of claim 41 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
anticipated by, or in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being obvious over Usui is reversed, pro forma.
The rejection of claims 52, 54-56, 62 and 64-66 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Usui is affirmed.
The rejection of claims 42, 44, and 46 under 35 U.S.C.
-18-
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007