Appeal No. 2000-1477 Page 2
Application No. 08/654,739
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a grille guard for a vehicle. An understanding
of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which appears in
the appendix to the appellant's Brief.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims is:
Go Rhino! Catalog 960, pages 1-8, 1996 (Go Rhino)
Claims 1-16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Go Rhino.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the Answer
(Paper No. 23) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection, and to
the Brief (Paper No. 22) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 24) 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, to the applied prior art reference, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007