Appeal 2006-1581
Application 10/2006-1581
Claims 1-4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by or, in the alternative, as being obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103
over Tuzuki.
Claims 1-4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious
over Matsuba. (U.S. Patent 5,093,420 or the European counterpart of EPA
0 392 465).
Claims 1-4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
obvious over Kanegafuchi.
We have carefully reviewed Appellants' Appeal Brief filed November
2, 2004, the Substitute Examiner's Answer mailed November 3, 2005, and
Appellants' Reply Brief filed on December 30, 2005, and the evidence of
record, in making our determinations herein. We note that the Substitute
Examiner's Answer is in response to the Remand to the Examiner mailed
September 28, 2005. Our reference to the Answer in this decision is a
reference to the Substitute Examiner’s Answer mailed on November 3,
2005.
I. The Art Rejections
We first note that our determinations made herein equally apply to
each of the art references applied by the Examiner. Although we may
discuss a particular reference by name or a particular reference range
teaching, the determinations made hereinafter equally apply to each of the
art rejections of record, resulting in the same outcome.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007