Appeal No. 96-2612
Application 08/137,530
Iten therefore anticipates claim 1, since it dis-
closes all the limitations recited therein. Since appellant
does not explain why any of the limitations recited in claims
3, 5 to 7, 12, 14 and 19 would impart separate patentability
to those claims in relation to claim 1, those claims will fall
with claim 1. 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7).6
Appellant’s argument [II] would seem to be applica-
ble to claims 8, 16 and 19. We do not agree with appellant
that Iten does not disclose a retention means comprising a 7
clearance slot and a locking shoulder. In Iten, there is a
clearance slot at 38, and locking shoulders at the upper
corners of bar 40, which are engaged by the teeth 24 on center
prongs 20, as shown in
it as such.
6We note that claim 19 recites a “disposable razor,”
while its parent claim 14 is drawn to a “handle.” This dis-
crepancy should be corrected in the event of any further
prosecution.
7Although appellant argues concerning a retention means
“consisting of” certain items, the claims use the open-ended
term “comprise.”
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007