Ex Parte Yagi et al - Page 10

               Appeal No. 2006-1872                                                                                                
               Application No. 09/769,376                                                                                          
               claims 1 and 3-5 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) based upon anticipation by Kon.  Nor do we sustain                        
               the rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based upon obviousness over Kon in view of                        
               Beeson.  Because all of the claims remain rejected, the decision of the Examiner is affirmed.                       
                       No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be                       
               extended under 37 CFR  § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).                                                                           


                                                          AFFIRMED                                                                 






                                      BRADLEY R. GARRIS                            )                                              
                                      Administrative Patent Judge                   )                                              
                                                                                    )                                              
                                                                                    )                                              
                                                                                    )                                              
                                                                                    )    BOARD OF PATENT                           
                                      PETER F. KRATZ                         )                                                     
                                      Administrative Patent Judge                         )        APPEALS AND                     
                                                                                    )                                              
                                                                                    )       INTERFERENCES                          
                                                                                    )                                              
                                                                                    )                                              
                                      CATHERINE TIMM                         )                                                     
                                      Administrative Patent Judge                         )                                        






               CT/hh                                                                                                               



                                                                10                                                                 



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November  3, 2007