Ex parte MILETI - Page 2




                Appeal No. 96-3885                                                                                                            
                Application No. 08/255,076                                                                                                    


                claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form                                                                
                including all of the limitations of the base claim and any                                                                    
                intervening claims.                                                                                                           


                         Appellant’s invention pertains to a toy for being launched                                                           
                by a person in a manner similar to a sling through the air to                                                                 
                impart speed to the toy and create airflow past the toy, to a                                                                 
                process of preparing a readily packagable throwing toy, to a                                                                  
                throwing toy, and to a toy for being launched through the air to                                                              
                impart speed to the toy and to create airflow past the toy.  An                                                               
                understanding of the invention can more fully be derived from a                                                               
                reading of exemplary claims 1, 8, 15, and 19, as they appear in                                                               
                the application file. 2                                                                                                       


                         As evidence of obviousness, the examiner has applied the                                                             
                patents listed below:                                                                                                         
                Klahn et al. (Klahn)                      4,151,674                        May   1, 1979                                      
                Stauffer                                  4,290,226                        Sep. 22, 1981                                      
                Waters                                    4,624,648                        Nov. 25, 1986                                      
                Hill                              4,790,788                                Dec. 13, 1988                                      

                         2We have relied upon the claims as they appear in the                                                                
                application file in light of errors found in the copies of the                                                                
                claims appended to appellant’s brief.                                                                                         
                                                                      2                                                                       





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007