Well guess it should not surprise anyone that a rejection based on Bugala in view of Taimura is exactly the same argument that the examiner used previously.
Bugala in view of Taminura has already been argued! So, not sure anymore whether or not the examiner accepted our definition of processing unit included in the 3/27/09 response. He seems to have totally disregarded it, but is well aware of the claim amendments made at the same time. I guess Bizzare would be the appropriate term to describe the latest office action.
I guess we copy and paste the prior arguments for Kajigaya, Tanimura and Bugala.
GLTA, Opty