Appeal No. 96-3841 Page 3
Application No. 08/093,664
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a deodorizing apparatus
and toilet. An understanding of the invention can be derived
from a reading of exemplary claims 1 and 23, which appear in the
appendix to the appellant's brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner as evidence of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are:
Mizutani 52-63882 3 May 26, 1977
(Japan)
Aibe et al. (Aibe) 2,088,719 June 16, 1982
(United Kingdom)
Sadao et al. (Sadao) 0,331,192 Sept. 6, 1989
(European Patent Application)
Masuda 1-268929 Oct. 26, 1989
(Japan)
Claims 1, 2, 5 to 9, 13, 16, 23, 25 and 26 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Sadao in view of
Mizutani and Aibe.
3Our understanding of this foreign language document is
based upon the translation dated April 1993 supplied by the PTO
during prosecution of this application.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007