Appeal No. 95-2976
Application No. 08/041,077
The references relied upon by the examiner in the
rejections before us are:
Renner et al. 1,661,577 Mar. 6, 1928
(Renner)
Bahadir et al. 4,743,448 May 10, 1988
(Bahadir)
Shiokawa et al. 5,034,524 Jul. 23, 1991
(Shiokawa)
Carlson et al. 5,157,207 Oct. 20, 1992
(Carlson)
Itzel et al. 0,254,196 Jan. 27, 1988
(European '196) (EP)
Claims 4, 6 and 8 through 10 stand rejected under the
second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 for failing to
particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter
which the appellants regard as their invention.
Claims 4, 6, 8, 12, 15 and 16 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Renner.
Finally, claims 4 through 20 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Renner or Renner in
view of European '196 or Renner in view of Carlson and Bahadir
and Shiokawa.
As a preliminary matter, we observe that the appellants
have grouped the claims on appeal in accordance with their
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007