Appeal 2007-3258
Application 10/916,195
1 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) of a final rejection of claims 1-8, 11, 13 and 15-16, the
2 only claims remaining in the application on appeal.
3 We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
4 The application on appeal was filed on 11 August 2004.
5 The real party in interest is The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
6 ("Goodyear").
7 The Examiner rejected all of the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
8 being unpatentable over the combination of Katsuki, Cahill and Masson.
9 The reader should know that no references to et al. are made in this opinion.
10 The following prior art was relied upon by the Examiner.
11
12 Name Patent Number Issue Date
13 Katsuki US 5,992,486 30 Nov. 1999
14 Cahill US 6,083,585 04 July 2000
15 Masson US 6,675,851 B1 13 January 2004
16
17 Katsuki and Cahill are prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
18 Masson is prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)
19 In this appeal, Goodyear has not attempted to antedate Masson.
20 Accordingly, for the purpose of this appeal, Masson is prior art.
21
22 B. Record on appeal
23 In deciding this appeal, we have considered only the following
24 documents:
25 1. Specification, including original claims (there are no
26 drawings).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013