Appeal 2007-2061
Application 10/319,429
reinforcing layer formed on the plastic layer, and a spacer comprising a foam
plastic that is at least partially penetrated by the plastic of the plastic layer.
The appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
follows:
(a) claims 5, 6, 8, 24, and 26 over Welich;
(b) claims 5, 7-9, 24, and 26-29 over Lutz;
(c) claims 26-29 over Maeda;
(d) claim 26 over Hashimoto; and
(e) claims 5, 7-9, 24, and 26-29 over Kralik.
The appealed claims also stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
follows:
(f) claim 6 over Lutz in view Fukahori;
(g) claim 6 over Kralik in view of Fukahori;
(h) claim 10 over Kralik in view of Konig;
(i) claim 11 over Kralik in view of EP ‘138;
(j) claims 15, 16, 18, 19, and 25 over Kralik in view of Alfter;
(k) claim 14 over Kralik in view of Alfter and Fukahori;
(l) claims 17 and 20 over Kralik in view of Alfter and Juriga;
(m) claims 13, 15-20, and 25 over Kralik in view of Lutz; and
(n) claim 14 over Kralik in view of Lutz and Fukahori.
We have thoroughly reviewed the respective positions advanced by
Appellant and the Examiner. In so doing, we find that the Examiner’s § 102
rejection over Kralik and § 103 rejections over Kralik as a primary reference
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013