Appeal No. 1996-3918
Application No. 08/232,351
The examiner's rejections are explained on pages 3-7 of
the answer. The arguments of the appellant and the examiner
in support of their respective positions may be found on pages
4-18 of the brief and pages 3-9 of the answer. As evidence of
nonobviousness the appellant has relied on a self-executed
declaration and declarations by Maier and Lee.
OPINION
As a preliminary matter, we base our understanding of the
appealed subject matter upon the following interpretation of
the terminology appearing in the claims. In line 7 of claim 1
we interpret "directly to said slide means" to be -- directly
to said center bracket --. Similarly, in line 9 of claim 21
we interpret "directly to said slide [sic]" to be -- directly
to said center bracket --.
We have carefully reviewed the appellant's invention as
described in the specification, the appealed claims, the prior
art applied by the examiner, the evidence of nonobviousness
supplied by appellant, 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
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007