Ex parte SOTELO et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 97-2119                                                          
          Application No. 08/263,825                                                  


                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1                 
          through 14.                                                                 
               The disclosed invention relates to a timer for producing               
          a series of output signals to an apparatus for automatically                
          dispensing feed at a predetermined relation to lunar transit                
          time.                                                                       
               Claim 1 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it               
          reads as follows:                                                           
               1. A timer comprising an output and means for producing a              
          series of signals on the output at a predetermined relation to              
          lunar transit time, the signals of the series being spaced                  
          apart by an average of about twenty four hours fifty one                    
          minutes.                                                                    
               The references relied on by the examiner are:                          
          Carlson                       4,035,661                July 12,             
          1977                                                                        
          Fishman et al. (Fishman)           5,160,068                Nov.            
          3, 1992                                                                     
          (filed Oct. 11,                                                             
          1989)                                                                       
               Claims 1 through 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103                
          as being unpatentable over Carlson.                                         
               Claims 8 through 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103               
          as being unpatentable over Fishman in view of Carlson.                      

                                          3                                           





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007