Appeal No. 1996-3860
Application 08/312,819
in the appendix attached to this decision.
The references relied upon by the examiner are:
Talbot 1,937,468 Nov. 28, 1933
Weidenheimer et al (Weidenheimer) 2,770,553 Nov. 13, 1956
Wai 3,444,290 May 13, 1969
Barshay et al (Barshay) 4,928,840 May 29, 1990
Boardman et al (Boardman) 5,188,688 Feb. 23, 1993
Sauter 5,317,849 Jun. 7, 1994
The rejections before us are:
I. Claims 9, 11-13, 16 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 over Talbot in
view of Barshay and Weidenheimer;
II. Claims 14 -15 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 over Talbot in view
of Barshay and Weidenheimer taken further with Wai;
III. Claim 10 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 over Talbot in view of Barshay,
Weidenheimer and Boardman;
IV. Claim 9 -11, 13 -14, and 17-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 102(e)/103
over Sauter; and
V. Claims 12 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 over Sauter in view of
Barshay.
After careful consideration of the rejections before us, the applied prior art, the
arguments of appellants and the examiner, we find ourselves in complete agreement with
appellants and accordingly, we reverse each of the above rejections.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007