Ex Parte Birrenkott et al - Page 3

                Appeal 2006-1127                                                                              
                Application 10/712,970                                                                        
                      an orifice disposed in the spraying device for metering a                               
                predetermined amount of the first liquid from the cartridge into the valve                    
                structure when the valve structure is in the first position to achieve a                      
                predetermined ratio of the first liquid to the second liquid in the outlet                    
                stream.                                                                                       
                      The Examiner relies upon the following references as evidence of                        
                anticipation and obviousness:                                                                 
                Packard  US 2,991,939 July 11, 1961                                                           
                Spencer  US 3,797,741 March 19, 1974                                                          
                Norman  US 4,878,619 November 7, 1989                                                         
                Shanklin  US 6,578,776 B1 June 17, 2003                                                       

                      Claims 1 through 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14 through 17, 19 through 21, 23                      
                through 25, 27 through 29, and 31 through 33 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                   
                § 102(b) as being anticipated by Norman.                                                      
                      Claims 10, 13, 18, and 26 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                    
                being unpatentable over Norman.                                                               
                      Claims 6, 22, and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being                   
                unpatentable over Norman in view of Packard.                                                  
                                                 OPINION                                                      
                      For the reasons set forth below, we sustain the rejections of claims 1                  
                through 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over                         
                Norman, of claims 10, 13, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Norman                         
                and of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Norman in view of Packard.                       
                      We will not sustain the rejection of claims 16, 19 through 21, 23                       
                through 25, 27 through 29, and 31 through 33 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over                    



                                                      3                                                       


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007