Appeal No. 99-0637 Page 2
Application No. 08/711,841
being objected to as depending from a rejected claim (answer,
page 2).2
We AFFIRM and enter new rejections pursuant to the
provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b).
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to an apparatus and
method for connecting a tube to a surface so as to create a
zero dead volume seal. An understanding of the invention can
be derived from a reading of exemplary claims 1 and 12, which
appear in the appendix to the appellants' brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Anderson, Jr. (Anderson) 4,690,437 Sep. 1,
1987
Silvis et al. (Silvis) 5,288,113 Feb. 22, 1994
2 Claims 1 through 8 and 12 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Anderson or Silvis and claims 9 through 11 and 13 through
17 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson or
Silvis in the final rejection (Paper No. 4). The rejections of claims 2, 4
through 11 and 13 through 17 were withdrawn by the examiner with the
explanation "upon reconsideration, the rejection is no longer urged against
claims 2, 5-11 and 13-17 since such claims are deemed allowable subject to
being rewritten to include the subject matter of the parent claims." As claim
4 depends from claim 2 and as claim 4 is not included in the statements of the
rejections in the answer, we presume that the examiner intended to include
claim 4 in the list of claims indicated to be allowable.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007