Appeal No. 2006-1255
Application No. 10/655,076
THE REFERENCES
Van Romer et al. (Van Romer ‘588) 5,090,588 Feb. 25, 1992
Shaw et al. (Shaw) 5,429,437 Jul. 04, 1995
Van Romer (Van Romer ‘233) 5,762,233 Jun. 09, 1998
Kellogg et al. (Kellogg ‘188) 5,971,188 Oct. 26, 1999
Kellogg et al. (Kellogg ‘924) RE37,924 Dec. 10, 2002
THE REJECTIONS
The claims stand rejected as follows: claim 16 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, written description
requirement; claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as
indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly
claim the subject matter which the appellant regards as the
invention; claims 1, 7, 14 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as1
anticipated by Kellogg ‘188 or Kellogg ‘924; claims 1-8 and 13-17
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Van Romer ‘233 in view of
Kellogg ‘188 and Kellogg ‘924; claims 1, 2 and 7-17 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Van Romer ‘588 in view of
Kellogg ‘188 and Kellogg ‘924; and claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as obvious over Van Romer ‘588 in view of Kellogg ‘188,
Kellogg ‘924 and Shaw.
1The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, is
withdrawn as to claims 14-16 in the examiner’s answer (page 9).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007