Appeal No. 95-3900 Page 4
Application No. 07/978,030
The examiner relied on the following references in
rejecting the claims:
Rammos (Rammos EP) EP 0 317 414 A13 pub'd. 24 May 1989
Wildey et al. (Wildey) EP 0 384 780 A2 pub'd. 29 Aug.
19904
Rammos (Rammos) US 5,061,943 29 Oct. 1991
filed 31 July 1989
All claims were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated
by Wildey. The examiner rejected claims 2, 5-7, 9, and 10
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as having been obvious in view of
Rammos. Claims 3 and 4 were rejected under section 103 as
having been obvious in view of the combined teachings of
Rammos and Rammos EP.
DISCUSSION
Claim 9 requires a "lower plate [that] has integral
concave regions formed at the positions corresponding to the
positions of said plurality of holes of said upper plate".
The examiner relies on "[t]he tray 29 and lands 23 of Wildey
3 Our understanding of this reference depends on a
translation prepared for the Office, a copy of which is
attached.
4 Appellants claim the benefit of a foreign priority
date of 8 November 1989. They have not, however, challenged
the admissibility of the Wildey reference, nor perfected their
priority claim by filing a certified translation pursuant to
§ 1.55(a).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007