Appeal No. 2006-1373
Application No. 09/814,054
Rejections At Issue
A. Claims 51, 52, 55-65, 67 and 68 stand rejected under 35 USC 103 as being
unpatentable over the combination of Asano et al. and Ohmura et al.
B. Claims 53, 54 and 66 stand rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over
the combination of Asano et al, Ohmura et al. and Kubon.
Rather than reiterating the arguments of Appellant and the Examiner, the opinion
refers to respective details in the Briefs1 and the Examiner’s Answer.2 Only those
arguments actually made by Appellant have been considered in this decision. Arguments,
which Appellant could have made but chose not to make in the Briefs have not been taken
into consideration. See 37 CFR 41.37(c)(1) (vii) (eff. Sept. 13, 2004).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have carefully considered the subject
matter on appeal, the Examiner’s rejections, the arguments in support of the rejections and
the evidence of obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as support for the rejections. We
have, likewise, reviewed and taken into consideration Appellant’s arguments set forth in
the Briefs along with the Examiner’s rationale in support of the of the rejections and
arguments in the rebuttal set forth in the Examiner’s Answer.
It is our view, after full consideration of the record before us, that we do not agree
with the Examiner that claims 51, 52, 55-65, 67 and 68 are properly rejected under 35 USC
1 Appellant filed an Appeal Brief on June 24, 2005. Appellant filed a Reply Brief on November 01, 2005.
2 The Examiner mailed an Examiner’s Answer on October 19, 2005. Examiner mailed an office
communication on February 03, 2006, stating that the Reply Brief has been entered and considered.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007