Appeal No. 95-2721 Page 3
Application No. 08/054,927
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to a titanium
orthodontic appliance. An understanding of the invention can
be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which appears
in the appendix to the appellants' brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Takahashi et al. 5,068,003 Nov. 26,
1991
(Takahashi)
Hilgers et al. 5,131,843 July
21, 1992
(Hilgers) (filed May 6,
1991)
Sachdeva et al. 5,232,361 Aug. 3,
1993
(Sachdeva) (filed Apr. 6,
1992)
Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as
being anticipated by Hilgers.
Claims 1 through 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Sachdeva in view of Takahashi.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007