Appeal No. 98-0806
Application No. 08/693,588
patentable. Accordingly, claims 1-4, 7, 8 and 12 will stand
or fall with representative claim 7. Claims 6 and 11 will
stand or fall with representative claim 11. Claims 13-16, 18-
20, 23 and 24 will stand or fall with representative claim 19.
Claims 9 and 21 will stand or fall alone. See 37 CFR §
1.192(c)(7).
We have carefully reviewed the appellant's invention as
described in the specification, the appealed claims, the prior
art applied by the examiner and the respective positions
advanced by the appellant in the brief and by the examiner in
the answer. As a consequence of this review, we will sustain
the rejections of claims 1-4, 7, 8, 12-16, 18-20, 23 and 24,
but not the rejections of claims 6, 9, 11 and 21. Our reasons
for these determinations follow.
Considering first the rejection of claims 1-4, 7, 8 and
12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Fritzberg in view of Bellows, it is the examiner's position
that it would have been obvious "to modify the clip of
Fritzberg to be of a substantially planar structure" (answer,
page 4) in view of the teachings of Bellows. The appellant,
however, contends that (1) Bellows represents non-analogous
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007