Appeal No. 97-2535
Application 08/129,108
An amendment directed to claim 18 and filed with appellants' reply brief has been entered by
the examiner (see the supplemental answer mailed January 29, 1997). A copy of claim 18 in its
amended form, along with the other appealed claims, is appended to appellants' reply brief (Paper No.
24). Because of the multiple dependency of claims 14, 15, 17 and 18, the copy of the claims
appended to appellants' reply brief, as well as appellants' main brief, include claims that were
withdrawn by the examiner as being direct to a non-elected invention. To set the record straight, the
claims on appeal are claims 9, 10, 14/9, 14/10, 15/14/9, 15/14/10, 16, 17/9, 17/10, 18/9, 18/10 and
19 through 24.
A copy of claim 9, which is illustrative of the subject matter at issue, is appended to this
decision.
The following references are relied upon by the examiner as evidence of obviousness in support
of his rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103:
Marques 4,054,223 Oct. 18, 1977
Schutz 4,909,387 Mar. 20, 1990
Rudko 4,921,196 May 1, 1990
Salaun et al. (Salaun) 2,643,043 Aug. 17, 1990
(France Application)3
3Translation attached.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007