Appeal No. 1999-2102 Page 2
Application No. 08/715,990
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a dispenser for plastic bags. An understanding
of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 11, which appears in the
appendix to the appellant's Brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Wheeler 438,567 Oct. 14, 1890
Gage 3,154,232 Oct. 27, 1964
Richardson 4,714,191 Dec. 22, 1987
Claims 11 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Wheeler in view of Richardson.
Claims 12 and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Wheeler in view of Richardson and Gage.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer (Paper
No. 16) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the Brief
(Paper No.15) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the
appellant’s specification and claims, the applied prior art references, the respective
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007