Appeal No. 96-1457
Application No. 08/098,165
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Cummins 3,283,685 Nov. 8, 1966
Van Allen 4,304,479 Dec. 8, 1981
Ohmura 4,527,874 July 9, 1985
Tsuchida 5,046,833 Sep. 10, 1991
Taylor 5,222,025 June 22, 1993
The following references were cited by the examiner
(Supplemental Answer, paper number 14) in response to appellants’
challenge (Reply Brief, pages 4 and 5) to the examiner’s taking
of Official Notice (Answer, page 11) that it is known in the art
to (a) store a camera in a wallet, (b) remove the camera from the
wallet, (c) upon removal of the camera from the wallet, take a
picture, and then (d) return the camera to the wallet:
Little 844,152 Feb. 12, 1907
Rice 5,043,751 Aug. 27, 1991
Claims 13 and 24 stand rejected under the first paragraph of
35 U.S.C. § 112 as failing to adequately teach how to make and/or
use the invention, i.e., for failing to provide an enabling
disclosure.
Claim 25 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Cummins.
Claims 1, 5, 6, 8 through 10 and 14 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Cummins in view of
Ohmura.
Claims 2 through 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007