Appeal No. 2006-1769
Application No. 09/784,292
The examiner relies upon the following as evidence of unpatentability:
Wallach (Wallach) 4,944,734 Jul. 31, 1990
Kuen (Kuen ‘162) 5,304,162 Apr. 19, 1994
Keuhn, Jr. et al. (Keuhn, Jr.) 5,374,262 Dec. 20, 1994
Kuen (Kuen ‘789) 5,423,789 Jun. 13, 1995
Yeo (Yeo) 5,509,913 Apr. 23, 1996
Ygge et al. (Ygge) 5,549,593 Aug. 27, 1996
Sauer (Sauer) 5,624,428 Apr. 29, 1997
LaFortune et al. (La Fortune) 5,669,901 Sep. 23, 1997
The following rejections are before us for review:
1. The examiner has rejected claims 1-2, 5-12, 14-21, 23, 25,
27, 29, 30, 34 and 36-39 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Kuen ‘162 in view of Keuhn, Jr. and
Sauer.
2. The examiner has rejected claims 13, 31-33 and 40 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kuen ‘162,
Keuhn, Jr. and Sauer, as applied to claims 10, 21 and 34, and
further in view of Yeo and Wallach.
3. The examiner has rejected claims 3 and 35 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kuen ‘162, Keuhn, Jr.
and Sauer, as applied to claims 1 and 34, and further in view
of Kuen ‘789.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007