Ex parte HOLMQUIST - Page 3




          Appeal No. 95-3943                                                         
          Application 08/050,318                                                     


          assisting in vertical lifting of said desktop above said support           
          stand and for locking said desktop in vertical position above              
          said support stand, each of said first and second gas spring               
          means including a handle for manual operation thereof.                     

               The references of record relied upon by the examiner in a             
          rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are:                         
          Guglielmi                     3,080,835           Mar. 12, 1963            
          Sema                          4,703,700           Nov.  3, 1987            
          Pülz (German                 25 39 713           Mar. 17, 1977             
          Offenlegungsschrift)4                                                      

               Claims 4, 5 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103                
          as being unpatentable over Pülz in view of Guglielmi and Sema.             
               Rather than reiterate the examiner's statement of the                 
          above rejections and the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the            
          examiner and the appellant, we refer to pages 4 and 5 of the               
          examiner's answer, to the supplemental answer (Paper No. 21),              
          to pages 2 through 4 of the appellant's brief and to the reply             
          brief for the full exposition thereof.                                     






               Our understanding of this reference results from our reading of a4                                                                    
          translation of this reference which was prepared for the U.S. Patent and   
          Trademark Office.  A copy of the translation has been appended to this     
          decision for the convenience of the appellant.                             
                                          3                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007