Appeal No. 96-4045
Application 08/441,984
portion to said flange portion.
The reference of record relied upon by the examiner as
evidence of anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is:
Peterson et al. (Peterson) 4,998,759 Mar. 12,
1991
The following rejections are before us on appeal. Claim
22 has been rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph,
as being indefinite. According to the examiner, lines 7
through 12 are not drawn to the structural characteristics of
the bracket but are drawn to some structure that is separate
from and manipulates the bracket.
Claims 4 through 6 and 21 through 23 have been rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Peterson.
According to the examiner, Peterson discloses a bracket formed
from a unitary planar blank with a base 24, a flange 26, and
an aperture portion 30, 34, 36, 38 having one end integral
with the opposite end of the base portion 24. Reference is
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007