Appeal No. 1996-3828 Page 3
Application No. 08/304,465
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to a baffle mechanism.
An understanding of the invention can be derived from a
reading of exemplary claim 8, which appears in the appendix to
the appellants' brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Rowe 3,934,998 Jan.
27, 1976
Irwin et al. (Irwin) 4,466,821 Aug. 21,
1984
Claims 8 through 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Irwin in view of Rowe.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejection, we make reference to the final rejection (Paper No.
6, mailed December 15, 1995) and the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 8, mailed May 20, 1996) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the appellants'
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007