Ex parte FIORI - Page 3




                Appeal No. 96-2890                                                                                                            
                Application 08/318,781                                                                                                        


                         The references relied upon by the examiner to support the                                                            
                final rejection are:                                                                                                          
                Scott                                     4,883,278                                 Nov. 28, 1989                             
                THREE-DIMENSIONAL CHESS, Time, February 4, 1952, page 15 (Time).                                                              



                                                           THE REJECTIONS                                                                     
                         Claims 11 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  112, first                                                         
                paragraph, as being based upon a specification which fails to                                                                 
                provide support for the invention as now claimed.2                                                                            
                         Claims 11 and 22 also stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  112,                                                          
                second paragraph, as failing to particularly point out and                                                                    
                distinctly claim the subject matter which the appellant regards                                                               
                as the invention.2                                                                                                            
                         Claims 11 and 22 further stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                                                              
                 103 as being unpatentable over Scott in view of Time.                                                                       
                         The rejections are explained in the Examiner's Answer and in                                                         
                Paper No. 8.                                                                                                                  
                         The opposing viewpoints of the appellant are set forth in                                                            
                the Brief and the Reply Brief.                                                                                                


                         2This is a new rejection made for the first time in the                                                              
                Examiner’s Answer.                                                                                                            
                                                                      3                                                                       





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007