Appeal No. 2005-0490
Application 09/399,065
The examiner relies on the following reference:
Li et al. (Li) 6,345,279 Feb. 05, 2002
(filed Apr. 23, 1999)
Claims 1-10, 12-21 and 23-38 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by the disclosure of Li.
Claims 11 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over the teachings of Li.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejections advanced by the examiner and the evidence
of anticipation and obviousness relied upon by the examiner as
support for the rejections. We have, likewise, reviewed and
taken into consideration, in reaching our decision, the
appellants’ arguments set forth in the briefs along with the
examiner’s rationale in support of the rejections and arguments
in rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007