Appeal No. 2005-2512
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,431
teaching,” citing MPEP § 2131.01 (“Multiple Reference 35 U.S.C. 102 Rejections”).
Fin.Act. 9.
(2) Claims 1-6, 9, and 16-18 stand rejected under § 102(a) as anticipated by
Stark. Fin.Act. 10 para. 19. However, the Answer restates the basis of the rejection as
§ 102(b). Ans. 4.
(3) Claims 1-6, 9, and 16-18 stand rejected under § 103(a) for obviousness over
Stark in view of the Arcadia Manual, Tiwary, or Deng. Fin.Act. 20 para. 25.
(4) Claims 1-6, 9, and 16-18 stand rejected under § 103(a) over Rusu in view of
the Arcadia Manual, Tiwary, or Deng. Fin.Act. 29 para. 37.
(5) Claims 7 and 8 stand rejected under § 103(a) over either one of Stark and
Rusu considered in view of Railmill PB and RailMill IR. Fin.Act. 31 para. 47.
(6) Claims 10 and 11 stand rejected under § 103(a) over either one of Stark and
Rusu considered in view of the Railmill documents. Fin.Act. 33 para. 53.
(7) Claims 10 and 11 stand rejected under § 103(a) over either one of Stark and
Rusu considered in view of any one of the Arcadia Manual, Tiwary, and Deng and
further in view of Noguchi. Fin.Act. 33 para. 54.
(8) Claims 12-15 stand rejected under § 103(a) over either of Stark and Rusu in
view of the Railmill documents. Fin.Act. 35 para. 67.
(9) Claims 1-6, 9, and 16-18 stand rejected under § 103(a) over the Arcadia
Manual in view of Railmill PB or Mitsuhashi. Fin.Act. 37 para. 72.
15
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007