Appeal No. 96-0998
Application No. 08/180,288
The rejections
The Examiner’s Answer lists the following prior art as
relied upon in rejecting the claims:
Warner, Jr. et al. (Warner) 3,100,292 Aug. 6, 1963
Tognola 3,129,347 Apr. 14, 1964
Chapman et al. (Chapman) 4,737,774 Apr. 12, 1988
Valentini 4,754,644 Jul. 5, 1988.
The examiner has maintained eight grounds of rejection
numbered in the Examiner’s Answer as follows:
1. Claims 1, 4, 5, and 7-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, on the ground that the specification as
originally filed lacked a written description of the presently
claimed subject matter. Examiner’s Answer at 5, lines 2-9.
2. Claims 11 and 15-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to
particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter
which applicant regards as the invention. Examiner’s Answer at
5-6.
3. Claims 1, 7, 10 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Tognola. Examiner’s Answer at
6-7.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007