Ex parte GOLDSTEIN - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2000-0512                                                                                             
              Application No. 08/880,760                                                                                       


                                                      BACKGROUND                                                               
                      The appellant's invention relates to a cafe chair that is multi-functional, making it                    
              possible for a seated occupant to use the chair in various modes (specification, page 1).  Claim                 
              1 is illustrative of the invention and is reproduced in the opinion section of this decision.                    
                      The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed                 
              claims are:                                                                                                      
              Vosbikian et al. (Vosbikian)                         2,789,631             Apr. 23, 1957                         
              Engel                                                4,850,647             Jul.  25, 1989                        
              Johnson                                              5,474,356             Dec. 12, 1995                         
                      The following rejections are before us for review.                                                       
              (1)     Claims 1 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over                           
              Johnson.                                                                                                         
              (2)     Claims 3  and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over1                                                                                               

              Johnson in view of Engel.                                                                                        
              (3)     Claims 5-7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson in                    
              view of Vosbikian.                                                                                               






                      1Notwithstanding the examiner's statement that claim 3 is rejected as unpatentable over Johnson in view of
              Engel, the examiner's rejection of claim 3, which does not recite that the panel is formed of plywood, appears to be
              based upon the teachings of Johnson alone.                                                                       
                                                              2                                                                





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007