Appeal No. 2006-3146
Application No. 10/020,986
PRIOR ART
The prior art references of record relied upon by the Examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims are:
Appellants’ Admitted Prior Art (AAPA) in figure 1 and associated
discussion at pages 3-5 of the specification.
Shi et al. (Shi) 5,811,177 Sep. 22, 1998
Gledhill et al. (Gledhill) 6,180,176 Jan. 30, 2001
Gyotoku et al. (Gyotoku) 6,195,142 Feb. 27, 2001
Yang et al. (Yang) 6,383,048 May 7, 2002
REJECTIONS
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the
Examiner and the Appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make
reference to the Examiner's answer (mailed Apr. 19, 2006) for the reasoning
in support of the rejection, and to Appellants’ brief (filed Feb. 7, 2006) and
reply brief (filed Jun. 19, 2006) for the arguments thereagainst.
Claims 1, 4 - 6, 9 and 34 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over AAPA in view of Yang and further in view of
Gyotoku. Claims 10, 11, 13-15, 18, 19-21 and 25 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over AAPA in view of Yang.
Claims 26-33 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over AAPA in view of Shi. Claims 12 and 22 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over AAPA and Yang and further in
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007