Appeal No. 1997-0635 Page 3
Application No. 08/375,183
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Scott (945) or Scott (527) taken together
with either Di Giacomo or Ward, and further in view of
Urschel.
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over any one of Scott (527), Scott (945) and
Urschel taken together with Ward.
Claims 6 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the applied art as applied to claim 4
in the rejections set forth above, and further in view of
Rice.
Claims 5, 7 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over the applied art as applied to claim
4 in the rejections set forth above, and further in view of
Ford.
Claims 4 to 8 and 11 stand rejected under the judicially
created doctrine of double patenting over claims 1 to 12 of
Nasvik in view of Di Giacomo and Scott (945).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007