Appeal No. 2006-0863 Παγε 2
Application No. 10/323,325
THE PRIOR ART
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Adams 1,253,455 Jan. 15, 1918
Winslow 1,796,698 Mar. 17, 1931
Higuchi 3,358,340 Oct. 23, 1965
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1 to 3, 5, 7 to 12, 26 and 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Adams.
Claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Adams in view of Higuchi.
Claim 13 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Adams and Higuchi in view of Winslow.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer
(mailed December 1, 2004) and the supplemental answer (mailed May 25, 2005) for the
examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the brief (filed
September 10, 2004) for the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007