Appeal No. 96-1603
Application 08/057,989
refers to base plate 40 as the block rather than block 30. As
stated above, we find that Blatt does discloses a block (block
30) mounted integrally with the feed nut.
We agree with the examiner that element 44 is a fitting
member as broadly claimed and as such, we will sustain the
examiner’s rejection of claim 11. We shall also sustain this
rejection as it is directed to dependent claims 12 and 14
since the appellant has not challenged such with any
reasonable specificity, thereby allowing these claims to stand
or fall with the independent claim 11 from which they depend.
See Nielson, 816 F.2d at 1567, 2 USPQ2d at 1525.
In summary:
The examiner’s rejection of claims 13 under 35 U.S.C. §
112, first paragraph is sustained.
The examiner’s rejection of claims 15-20 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph is not sustained.
The examiner’s rejection of claims 1 and 11 under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Kato is sustained.
The examiner’s rejection of claims 15-18 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as anticipated by Kato is not sustained.
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007