Ex parte MALIK et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 97-0677                                                          
          Application No. 08/312,710                                                  


                                      BACKGROUND                                      
               The appellants' invention relates to a one-piece blow-                 
          molded plastic drum.  Claims 1 and 2, as they appear in the                 
          appendix to the appellants' brief, are attached to this                     
          decision.                                                                   


               The prior art references of record relied upon by the                  
          examiner as evidence of obviousness under 35 U.S.C.  103 are:              
          Ames                          4,489,847                     Dec.            
          25, 1984                                                                    
          Pyzytulla                     5,018,642                     May             
          28, 1991                                                                    



               Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as                 
          being unpatentable over Pyzytulla in view of Ames.                          


               Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced              
          by the examiner and the appellants regarding the  103                      
          rejection, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper                
          No. 13, mailed September 18, 1996) for the examiner's complete              
          reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the appellants'               


                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007