Appeal No. 1999-1990 Page 2
Application No. 08/635,599
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to a spray nozzle. An
understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading
of exemplary claim 1, which appears in the appendix to the
appellants' brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Anilin & Fabrik 606,350 2 June 11, 1926
(Fabrik) (France)
Dunham 166,515 Nov. 30, 1922
(Gr. Britain)
Claims 1 through 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as being anticipated by Fabrik.
Claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Fabrik in view of Dunham.
2In determining the teachings of Fabrik, we will rely on
the translation provided by the PTO. A copy of the
translation is attached for the appellants' convenience.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007