Appeal No. 2002-0030 Page 2
Application No. 09/314,267
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a toroidal wheel and includes the mounting
and driving thereof (specification, p. 1). A copy of the claims under appeal is set forth
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:
Bobek 1,416,253 May 16, 1922
Shih 5,778,998 July 14, 1998
Claim 7 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being
indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which
the appellant regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 8, 11, 12, 17 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Bobek.1
1 While claim 20 was not included in the statement of the rejection (final rejection, p. 3), claim 20
was specifically discussed in the body of the rejection (final rejection, p. 4).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007