Appeal No. 2006-3351
Application No. 10/011,882
view of Yue, as set forth in Final Office Action mailed
on July 8, 2005.
Claims 7 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Johansson in view
of Akram as applied to claim 1 above, and further in
view of Shibuya, as set forth in Final Office Action
mailed on July 8, 2005.
Throughout our opinion, we make references to the
Appellants’ briefs, and to the Examiner’s Answer
for the respective details thereof.1
OPINION
With full consideration being given to the subject
matter on appeal, the Examiner’s rejections and the
arguments of the Appellants and the Examiner, for the
reasons stated infra, we affirm the Examiner’s
rejections of claims 1 to 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
1
1Appellants filed an Appeal Brief on January 12, 2006, and a corrected Appeal
Brief on September 18, 2006. Appellants filed a Reply Brief on May 22, 2006.
The Examiner mailed an Examiner’s Answer on March 20, 2006.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013