Appeal No. 2002-0726 Page 2
Application No. 08/606,762
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a trap for luring and retaining insects (claims
1, 2, 4-6, 8, 10 and 11), to a kit for luring and retaining insects into a trap (claims 18 and
19) and to a method for luring and retaining insects into a trap (claims 23-25). An
understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1,
which appears in the appendix to the Brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Rutherford 2,046,430 Jul. 7, 1936
Carle (PCT Application) WO 94/19938 Sep. 15, 1994
Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8, 10, 11, 18, 19 and 23-25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Carle in view of Rutherford.
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. 49) and the final rejection (Paper No. 42) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the Brief (Paper No. 47) and Reply Brief
(Paper No. 51) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007