Appeal No. 2001-0058 Page 2
Application No. 281,815
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a method (claims 1-6) and apparatus (claims 7
and 8) for creating clouds of burning matter for use in military countermeasures. An
understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which
appears in an appendix to the appellant's Brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Geeraert 2,669,437 Feb. 16, 1954
Griffin et al. (Griffin) 2,971,573 Feb. 14, 1961
Lager 3,150,848 Sep. 29, 1964
McKinnon 3,154,041 Oct. 27, 1964
Sargent et al. (Sargent) 3,258,917 Jul. 5, 1966
Corino et al. (Corino) 3,639,258 Feb. 1, 1972
Claims 1 and 4-8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Lager in view of Griffin, Geeraert, Sargent and McKinnon.
Claims 2 and 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Lager in view of Griffin, Geeraert, Sargent, McKinnon and Corino.
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. 9) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the Brief
(Paper No. 8) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 10) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007