Appeal No. 2006-3016
Application No. 10/212,240
Schrock US 5,923,908 Jul. 13, 1999
Whitelaw US 6,157,416 Dec. 5, 2000
Appellant’s admitted prior art (AAPA), Figure 1, pages 1-2 of the Specification.
Claims 1, 11, 14 and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Mitani.
Claim 2 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Mitani in combination with AAPA.
Claims 3 and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Mitani in combination with Scheve.
Claims 5, 16, 17, 23 and 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Mitani in combination with Whitelaw.
Claims 6 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Mitani in combination with Yamada.
Claims 12 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Mitani in combination with Schrock.
Claim 13 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Mitani and Schrock in combination with Takiguchi.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013