Ex Parte Wolf - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2005-0911                                                                Page 2                
              Application No. 09/923,113                                                                                


              Further understanding of the invention may be obtained from claim 14 which reads as                       
              follows:                                                                                                  
                            14.  Shears comprising:                                                                     
                                   a head that contains one or more elements adapted                                    
                            to be directed toward the hair;                                                             
                                   a handle comprising finger loops, each finger loop                                   
                            having an inner diameter; and                                                               
                                   deformable grips located on each inner diameter,                                     
                            each grip having:                                                                           
                                          a deformable outer surface capable of                                         
                                          receiving at least a portion of the inner                                     
                                          diameter into itself; and                                                     
                                          a viscous medium enclosed by the outer                                        
                                          surface.                                                                      
                                                    The Prior Art                                                       
                     The examiner relied upon the following prior art references of record in rejecting                 
              the appealed claims:                                                                                      
              Tindall                            970,406                            Sept. 13, 1910                      
              McCall                             5,000,599                          Mar.  19, 1991                      

                                                    The Rejection                                                       
                     Claims 14 and 17-24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                                  
              unpatentable over Tindall in view of McCall.                                                              
                     Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                      
              the appellant regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the answer for                    






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007