Appeal No. 98-2325
Application No. 08/546,116
A copy of claim 1, 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:
Cannan et al. (Cannan) 3,882,961 May 13,
1975
Williams 4,015,683 Apr. 5,
1977
Belley 4,759,422 Jul. 26,
1988
Japanese patent application 4453-113173 Oct. 3,
1978
(Sakaki)
Claims 1 through 4, 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Belley in view of Sakaki and
Williams, and claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the references applied in the
3(...continued)
measuring the degree of this term. In particular, appellants’ specification
indicates on page 3 that a muffler of greater length would gain “little more
in noise reduction,” an example being a reduction of about 17 db from a value
of about 80 db.
4Translation attached.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007