Appeal No. 96-1596
Application No. 08/106,489
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a combination cap and
material tooling device. Claims 1 and 6 are representative of
the subject matter on appeal and a copy of those claims, as they
appear in the appellant's brief, is attached to this decision.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the
examiner as evidence of anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is:
Stull 2,930,063 March 29, 1960
Claims 1, 2, 4 through 11 and 13 through 17 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Stull.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and the appellant regarding the § 102(b) rejection,
we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 10, mailed
November 2, 1995) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejection, and to the appellant's brief (Paper No.
9, filed September 12, 1995) for the appellant's arguments
thereagainst.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007