Appeal No. 2006-1230 Παγε 11
Application No. 10/137,586
We turn next to claim 15. As claim 15 has not been
separately argued by appellant, claim 15 falls with claim 9, from
which it depends. The rejection of claim 15 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) is affirmed.
We turn next to claim 16. We affirm the rejection of claim
16 for the same reasons as we affirmed the rejection of claim 11.
We turn next to claim 17. We affirm the rejection of
claim 17 for the same reasons that we affirmed the rejection of
claim 12.
We turn next to claim 18. We affirm the rejection of claim
18 for the same reasons as we affirmed the rejection of claim 13.
We turn next to claim 19. We affirm the rejection of claim
19 for the same reasons as we affirmed the rejection of claim 14.
We turn next to claim 20. We affirm the rejection of claim
20 for the same reasons as we affirmed the rejection of claim 5.
SUMMARY
We have affirmed the rejection of claims 1-20 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Saito for the reasons
cogently set forth by the examiner in the answer, as amplified by
our comments and findings. However, because we found, supra,
that appellant was not sent a copy of the full translation of the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007