Appeal No. 96-3376
Application 08/164,889
appellants appears in the examiner's answer (Paper No. 18, mailed
March 11, 1996) and supplemental examiner's answer (Paper No. 20,
mailed May 15, 1996). Rather that reiterate appellants' position
on the obviousness issues raised in this appeal, we make
reference to the main and reply briefs (Paper Nos. 17 and 19) for
the complete statement of appellants' arguments.
OPINION
Having carefully considered appellants' specification
and claims, the applied references, and the respective viewpoints
of appellants and the examiner, we have reached the conclusions
which follow.
Turning first to the examiner's rejection of claims 28,
31 and 32 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on Carre, appellants have
argued (brief, page 9) that since independent claim 31 calls for
the ring to extend outwardly from the base "at least about three
inches," and since this feature is admittedly not even remotely
suggested in Carre, neither claim 31 nor claims 28 and 32 which
depend therefrom, are even remotely suggested by the applied
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007