Appeal No. 97-1177
Application 08/368,026
flow of water to a water rinsing device, such as a faucet or urinal, and are reproduced
in the appendix to appellants’ brief.
The reference applied in the final rejection is:
Shiba et al. (Shiba) 5,133,095 Jul. 28, 1992
The appealed claims stand finally rejected on the following grounds:
(1) Claims 1, 15 and 19, unpatentable for failing to comply with 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph.2
(2) Claims 1, 3, 6, 8 to 11 and 14 to 16, anticipated by Shiba, under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b).
(3) Claims 6, 8, 12 to 14 and 17 to 20, unpatentable over Shiba, under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103.
Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. § 112, Second Paragraph
This rejection is not mentioned in appellants’ brief. Under normal circumstances,
we would remand the application to the examiner to provide appellants with a one-
month period to file a supplemental brief. See M.P.E.P. § 1206, third paragraph of
“APPEAL BRIEF CONTENT” section.
However, in the present case, we are entering pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b) a
2In an advisory action dated October 7, 1996 (Paper No. 13), the examiner
stated that the rejection of claims 12 and 14 on this ground was overcome by the
amendment filed September 3, 1996.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007