Appeal No. 95-1727
Application No. 07/966,876
dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable
according to the examiner if rewritten in independent form
including all of the limitations of the base claim and any
intervening claims. These noted claims constitute all of the
claims remaining in the application.
Appellant’s invention pertains to a method of manufacturing
an interlocked lamination stack from a sheet of stock material
and a method of manufacturing a stack of interlocking laminations
from a sheet of stock material. An understanding of the
invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claims 1 and
8, with copies thereof being appended to appellant’s brief.
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner has applied the
documents listed below:
Zimmerle 3,203,077 Aug. 31, 1965
Martin 4,728,842 Mar. 1, 1988
Webb et al 5,075,150 Dec. 24, 1991
(Webb)
The following rejections are before us for review.
Claims 3 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007