Appeal No. 2006-1262
Application No. 10/013,543
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of unpatentability:
Ishiwata et al. (Ishiwata) 5,149,586 Sep. 22, 1992
Winslow et al. (Winslow) 5,741,543 Apr. 21, 1998
Kazuhiro et al. (Kazuhiro) 09-298173 Nov. 18, 1997
(Japanese Patent Abstract)
Claims 1 and 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Kazuhiro.
Claims 1 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Winslow.
Claims 1 through 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being obvious over Ishiwata in view of Kazuhiro.
We believe at this time that this case is not ready for
appeal and remand this application to the jurisdiction of the
examiner to consider the following issues:
Firstly, on page 7 of the Brief, appellants indicate that
claims 1 and 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by or, alternatively, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
obvious over Winslow. In the Final rejection mailed by the
examiner on January 23, 2004, on page 3, claims 1 and 3 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by or,
alternatively, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Winslow. Yet, on page 4 of the Answer, the examiner indicates
that claims 1 and 3 stand rejected only under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Winslow. The examiner has appeared to
have dropped the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1 through 3
as being obvious over Winslow. We ask the examiner to clarify
the rejection in this regard because of the apparent conflict
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007