Appeal No. 97-4205
Application 08/562,853
The appellant’s invention pertains to a firearm safety
storage box. Independent claim 1 is further illustrative of the
appealed subject matter and a copy thereof may be found in the
appendix to the appellant’s brief.
The prior art relied on by the examiner is:
Luisada 3,655,087 Apr. 11, 1972
Veenema 3,989,157 Nov. 2, 1976
Markovich 4,446,900 May 8, 1984
Sacks 5,149,203 Sep. 22, 1992
The answer states that the following rejections are
applicable to the claims on appeal:3
Claims 1-7 and 10-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Luisada in view of Veenema and Markovich.
Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Luisada in view of Veenema, Markovich and
"Official Notice."
Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Luisada in view of Veenema Markovich and Sacks.
The examiner’s rejections are explained on pages 5-7 of the
answer. The arguments of the appellant and examiner in support
3 In the final rejection claims 1-12 were also rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
112, second paragraph. In view of the lack of mention of this rejection in the
answer, we presume that the examiner has withdrawn the final rejection of claims
1-12 on this ground. See Ex parte Emm, 118 USPQ 180 (Bd.App. 1957).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007