Appeal No. 97-1086
Application 08/326,604
Appellants have simply not put forth any argument or
convincing line of reasoning as to why the examiner's reading
of claim 1 on the structure of Gallone Figure 5 is in error.
Accordingly, we will sustain the examiner's rejection of claim
1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on Gallone. Claims 2, 10, 11
and 12 which are grouped together with claim 1 will likewise
fall.
Turning to claim 3 and the claims which depend
therefrom, we note that appellants have argued (brief, pages
4-5) that the examiner's reading of the bottom wall of the
longitudinal grooves (25) of Gallone as the "series of guide
bar locator pieces" specified in claim 3 is unreasonable. We
agree with appellants' position. Given the particular
structure and function of the guide bar locator pieces set
forth in claim 3, we see no way that the bottom wall of the
longitudinal grooves (25) in Gallone Figure 5 can be read as
being such locator pieces. As a further point, we note that
the examiner's assertion (answer,
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007