Appeal No. 97-0149
Application 08/308,711
claims 1 and 2 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the combined
teachings of Ellis, Mori, Perlmutter and Vinck.
Turning to the rejection of claims 3-5 under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Ellis in view of Mori,
Perlmutter, Vinck and McKnight, the examiner has relied upon
the teachings of McKnight for a “lobe.” We must point out,
however, a “lobe” is not what is being claimed. Rather, what
is being claimed is that “rearward diverging opposite side
edges” are further required to be “straight for a majority of
their lengths” (emphasis ours) and have “one side edge having
a greater divergence than the other side edge.” We find
nothing in McKnight which would fairly suggest such an
arrangement. This being the case, we will not sustain the
rejection of claims 3-5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the
combined teachings of Ellis, Mori, Perlmutter, Vinck and
McKnight.
In summary:
The rejection of claims 1 and 2 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
based on the combined teachings of Ellis, Mori, Perlmutter and
Vinck is affirmed.
The rejection of claims 3-5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007