Appeal 2007-1114
Application 10/314,687
PRIOR ART
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the Examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims is:
Yoo 6,519,062 B1 Feb. 11, 2003
(Filed Sept. 1, 2000)
REJECTIONS
Claim 21 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
anticipated by Yoo.
Claims 22-31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Yoo.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the
Examiner and the Appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make
reference to the Examiner's Answer (mailed Nov. 16, 2006) for the
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to Appellants’ Brief (filed Sep.
14, 2006) and Reply Brief (filed Jan. 16, 2006) for the arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful
consideration to Appellants’ Specification and claims, to the applied prior art
reference, and to the respective positions articulated by Appellants and the
Examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the determinations
that follow.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013