Appeal No. 2000-1230
Application No. 08/717,904
Kinsey’s valve is attached appears to be illustrated as made
of metal, the valve itself would obviously be equally
applicable to use on a plastic tank.
In view of the foregoing, the rejection of claims 12 and
13 will be sustained.
The rejection of claims 14 and 21 will be sustained for
the reasons discussed above in connection with claims 13 and
12, respectively. The rejection of claim 15 will not be
sustained for the same reason that the rejection of claim 3
will not be.
Claim 11
In the second Office action (Paper No.6, Feb. 25, 1999),
the examiner stated that claim 11 was withdrawn from
consideration as being drawn to a non-elected species.
Appellants assert on page 11 of the brief that claim 11 should
be examined and is patentable because it depends from an
allowable generic claim.
We have held above that the rejection of claim 3, from
which claim 11 depends, will not be sustained. However,
unlike appellants (Response filed Nov. 23, 1998) and the
examiner (Paper No.4, Nov. 12, 1998), we do not view claim 3
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007