Appeal No. 96-2631
Application No. 08/177,616
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a safety penetrating
instrument. Claims 1, 6, 14 and 22 are representative of the
subject matter on appeal and a copy of those claims is attached
to this decision.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the
examiner as evidence of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is:
Allen et al. 5,312,354 May 17, 1994
(Allen) (filed Nov. 4, 1991)
Claims 1 through 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Allen.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and the appellant regarding the § 103 rejection, we
make reference to the examiner's first office action (Paper No.
5, mailed November 1, 1994), the final rejection (Paper No. 7,
mailed April 4, 1995) and the examiner's answer (Paper No. 12,
mailed November 17, 1995) for the examiner's complete reasoning
in support of the rejection, and to the appellant's brief (Paper
No. 11, filed August 29, 1995) and reply brief (Paper No. 13,
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007