Appeal No. 95-3931
Application 08/163,086
References of Record
The following references of record are relied upon by the examiner as evidence of obviousness:
Mertzweiller et al. (Mertzweiller) 2,560,360 Jul. 10, 1951
Rottig et al. (Rottig) 2,755,308 Jul. 17, 1956
Bahrmann et al. (Bahrmann) 4,578,523 Mar. 25, 1986
Cornils et al. (Cornils I) 4,593,126 Jun. 3, 1986
Bach et al. (Bach I) 4,795,727 Jan. 3, 1989
Bach et al. (Bach II) 4,801,754 Jan. 31, 1989
Cornils et al. (Cornils II) 4,808,757 Feb. 28, 1989
Bach et al. (Bach III) 4,808,758 Feb. 28, 1989
Herrmann et al. (Herrmann) 5,200,380 Apr. 6, 1993
The Rejections
I. Claims 1-4, 7 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Rottig or Mertzweiller in view of Bahrmann and appellants’ acknowledged state of the art.
II. Claims 5 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Rottig
or Mertzweiller in view of Bahrmann and appellants’ acknowledged state of the art and further in view of
Cornils I. Cornils II, Bach I, Bach II or Bach III. In his answer, the examiner did not specifically identify
which Cornils or Bach patents he was relying on. We assume that he is relying on each of the references.
III. Claims 8-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Rottig or
Mertzweiller in view of Bahrmann and appellants’ acknowledged state of the art and further in view of
Herrmann.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007