Appeal No. 2005-2351
Application No. 09/904,112
The examiner has relied upon the following references as
evidence of unpatentability:
Kingon et al. (Kingon) 5,555,486 Sep. 10, 1996
Joo 5,879,957 Mar. 09, 1999
Kunitomo et al. (Kunitomo) 6,235,572 May 22, 2001
Claims 1-6, 15, 22-30, 37-42, 45-46, 74-76 and 100-105 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by Kunitomo
(Answer, page 4). Claims 8-10, 43-44, 50 and 57-61 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Kunitomo
in view of Joo (Answer, page 6). Claims 62 and 63 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Kunitomo in view of
Joo and Kingon (id.).
Based on the totality of the record, including due
consideration of the opposing arguments in the Brief, Reply Brief
and the Answer, we affirm the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-6,
15, 22-30, 37-39, 74-76 and 100-105 under section 102(e) as
anticipated by Kunitomo essentially for the reasons stated in the
Answer and those set forth below. We reverse the rejection of
claims 40-42 and 45-46 under section 102(e) over Kunitomo, and we
also reverse all rejections on appeal based on section 103(a)
essentially for reasons stated in the Brief, Reply Brief, and
those reasons discussed below. Accordingly, the decision of the
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007