Appeal No. 200-0713
Application No. 09/494,935
respective copies of which appear in the APPENDIX to the main
substitute appeal brief (Paper No. 24).
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner has applied the
documents listed below:
Anderson 1,986,551 Jan. 1, 1935
Knispel et al 5,210,956 May 18, 1993
(Knispel)
Hoffman 5,894,677 Apr. 20, 1999
The following rejections are before us for review.
Claims 1 through 5, 7 through 9, 11, 12, 14 through 35, 37,
and 38 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Anderson in view of Knispel.
Claims 6, 10, 13, 36, and 39 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Anderson in view of Knispel,
as applied to claims 5, 9, 12, 35, and 38, further in view of
Hoffman.
The full text of the examiner’s rejections and response to
the argument presented by appellant appears in the answer (Paper
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007