Appeal No. 2001-2512
Application No. 09/248,742
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner
in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Batie et al. (Batie) 3,077,327 Feb. 12, 1963
Fanslau et al. (Fanslau) 4,527,829 July 9, 1985
Bradbury 4,676,548 June 30, 1987
Rettenberger 5,722,717 March 3, 1998
Amato 3,895,839 July 22, 1975
The rejections
Claims 8, 9 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Batie in view of Fanslau.
Claim 16 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Rattenberger in view of Bradbury.
Claims 16 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Batie in view of Bradbury.
Claims 11 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Batie in view of Fanslau and Bradbury.
Claims 12 and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Batie in view of Fanslau and Amato.
Claims 17 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Batie in view of Bradbury and Amato.
Claims 17 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Rettenberger in view of Bradbury and Amato.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007