Appeal No. 96-3263
Application No. 08/363,594
We have also reviewed the Watts reference additionally
applied in the rejection of claim 5, and the Ehrlich reference
applied with Watts in the rejection of claims 7 and 8 but find 6
nothing therein which makes up for the deficiencies of ANCRA and
Berns discussed above. Accordingly, we cannot sustain the
examiner's rejection of appealed claims 5, 7 and 8 under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
1 through 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
6Independent claim 7 also recites, inter alia, the coupling
clip member and circular aperture as in claim 1.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007