Appeal No. 94-4239
Application 07/942,293
depicted embodiment, a "separate" elastic or spring ring 4 is
sprung into interlocking relationship with a frame. Thus,
this ring is clearly not integrally formed with the reflective
field 1, i.e., it is not joined to the reflective field as
part of the overall mirror prior to mounting the mirror in its
frame. As to the patentee's disclosure of a direct
application of a defining border to the glass plate (page 1,
lines 82 through 85), it is clear to us that this would denote
a border or opaque band that is integrally formed with a
reflective field, as now claimed. However, we do not discern
that the aforesaid resulting glass plate mirror would include
a mounting flange, as claimed, integrally formed with the
opaque band. Thus, we conclude that the subject matter of
appellants' claim 1 (and dependent claims) is not anticipated
by the Horton patent.
NEW GROUND OF REJECTION
Under the authority of 37 CFR § 1.196(b), we
introduce the following new ground of rejection.
Claims 1 through 4, 6, and 7 are rejected under
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007