Appeal No. 1999-1502
Application 08/600,060
to 21 have been allowed, and claims 4, 5 and 8 have been
indicated as allowable if rewritten in independent form.
The appealed claims are drawn to a free-standing cabinet
unit, and are reproduced in the appendix of appellants’ brief.
The reference applied in the final rejection is:
De Lisle 2,404,949 Jul. 30, 1946
A reference, of record, applied herein in a rejection2
pursuant to 37 CFR 1.196(b)is:
Harman 1,889,783 Dec. 6,
1932
Claims 1 to 3, 6 and 7 stand finally rejected as
anticipated by De Lisle, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
The issue involved here is whether the pivot axis of
De Lisle’s pivots 24 is “upright-oriented”, as recited in
independent claim 1. If it is not, then the rejection cannot
stand, because a reference does not anticipate unless it
discloses “every limitation of the claimed invention, either
2This reference was cited by appellants in an Information Disclosure Statement
filed on March 17, 1997 (Paper No. 5).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007