Ex parte HANSSEN et al. - Page 2




               Appeal No. 1997-3254                                                                                                 
               Application No. 08/495,330                                                                                           


                       We affirm-in-part.                                                                                           



                                                        BACKGROUND                                                                  

                       The invention is directed to a coaxial cable having an outer conductor formed of an                          

               electroconductive lacquer.  Claim 1 is reproduced below.                                                             

               1.      A coaxial cable comprising                                                                                   

                       a central conductor;                                                                                         

                       an outer conductor, said outer conductor being an electroconductive lacquer conductor;                       

                       an electrically insulating layer separating said central and said outer conductor.                           


                       The examiner relies on the following references:                                                             

               Berends                3,569,611               Mar.  9, 1971                                                         
               Sherman                4,199,408               Apr. 22, 1980                                                         
               Sato                   4,847,448               Jul.   11, 1989                                                       



                       Claims 1-3 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by Berends.                            

                       Claims 4-6, 8, 9, and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Berends.                  

                       Claims 7, 10, 14, and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Berends                   

               and Sato.                                                                                                            

                       Claim 11 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Berends and Sherman.                     

                                                               - 2 -                                                                





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007