Appeal No. 1995-2811
Application No. 08/164,830
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Brenn 2,105,448 Jan. 11, 1938
Russell 4,333,980 Jun. 08, 1982
Wilen 4,824,503 Apr. 25, 1989
Gruttemeyer et al. 4,938,505 Jul. 03, 1990
(Gruttemeyer)
Appealed claims 1-9, 11 and 12 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Brenn in view of
Gruttemeyer and Wilen. Claim 10 stands rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the stated
combination of references further in view of Russell.3
We have carefully reviewed the examiner's rejections in
light of the prior art evidence and the arguments advanced by
appellant and the examiner. In so doing, we are in complete
agreement with appellant that the prior art cited by the
examiner fails to establish a prima facie case of obviousness
for the claimed subject matter. Accordingly, we will not
sustain the examiner's rejections for the reasons set forth in
appellant's principal brief. Since we totally agree with
3The new ground of rejection of claims 5-9, 11 and 12
under § 103 over Brenn or Australian '161 in view of Wilen has
been withdrawn by the examiner. See the examiner's letter of
November 13, 1998 (Paper No. 24).
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007