Appeal No. 2000-0516 Page 2
Application No. 08/935,609
claims 1-28 and treated claims 29-32 as pending. The appellants' intent to cancel claims 1-281
was confirmed in the remarks on page 2 of the amendment filed February 8, 1999 (Paper No.
9). In any event, it is clear from the appellants' brief (Paper No. 14, page 1) and the
examiner's final rejection (Paper No. 10, page 1) that both the appellants and the examiner
consider claims 29-32 to be the only claims pending in this application and that claim 32 is the
only claim before us on appeal.2
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to a method of retrofitting a support member to a
preexisting concrete form. The support member may be used to facilitate attachment of safety
hooks or other fall-prevention devices or as a handle for carrying the concrete form
(specification, page 7). Further understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading
of method claim 32, which appears in the appendix to the appellants' brief.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed
claims is:
McMullan 2,574,274 Nov. 6, 1951
The following rejection is before us for review.
Claim 32 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over McMullan.
The reference to claims 1-31 as having been canceled in the preliminary amendment was apparently an1
error on the part of the examiner.
A review of the application file reveals that claims 1-24 have not been clerically canceled. We leave this2
informality to be resolved by the examiner in the event of further prosecution.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007