Appeal No. 2000-0530
Application No. 08/811,192
and 36, copies of which appear in the APPENDIX to the main
brief (Paper No. 19).
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner has applied the
documents listed below:
Vance 4,209,931 Jul. 1,
1980
Carabasse 1,209,513 Oct.
21, 1970
(Great Britain)
Trifonov 1,717,045 Mar. 7,
1992
(Soviet Union) (SU ’045)1
The following rejections are before us for review.
Claims 27-28, and 35-44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Vance in view of SU ’045.
Claims 45-46 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Vance, as applied to claims 27 and 36
above, further in view of Carabasse.
1 Our understanding of this document is derived from a
reading of a translation thereof prepared in the United States
Patent and Trademark Office. A copy of the translation is
appended to this opinion.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007