Appeal No. 2000-0604
Application No. 08/483,735
while the examiner has proffered a rationale for placing the
enclosure portion of the Burgess device above or on the
ground, as required by claim 43, with only the portion of the
bait assembly 12 extending from the enclosure portion located
in the ground, Burgess provides no suggestion for such use of
the device.
For the foregoing reasons, we shall not sustain the
examiner's rejection of independent claims 43 and 44, or of
claims 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 45, 46, 49 and 50 which depend from
claims 43 and 44, as being unpatentable over Burgess.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007