Appeal No. 96-3613
Application 08/335,496
limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims
8, 9, and 37 through 44, the only other claims remaining in the
application, stand allowed. In light of the above, we have
claims 27, 29, and 31 through 36 before us for review.
Appellant’s disclosed invention pertains to a foam dispenser
for dispensing a foaming liquid substance. An understanding of
the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim
27, a copy of which appears in the appendix to appellant’s brief.
The following rejection is the sole rejection on appeal.
Claims 27, 29, and 31 through 36 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as being based upon a
specification which, as originally filed, does not support the
claimed invention.
The full text of the examiner's rejection and response to
the argument presented by appellant appears in the answer filed
May 30, 1996 (Paper No. 11), while the complete statement of
appellant’s argument can be found in the brief (Paper No. 10).
As to the rejection of claims 27, 29, and 31 through 36,
appellant indicates (brief, page 7) that they stand or fall
together. Thus, we select claim 27 for review and shall focus
our attention exclusively thereon below; 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007