Appeal No. 1997-1885
Application No. 08/296,671
claims. The rejection is based on pure speculation. This size
limitation applies to claim 10. Therefore, we do not sustain
the rejection of claim 10.
In conclusion, we have decided the obviousness of the
molded cap feature adversely to appellants, but we have
decided the obviousness of the other three features in favor
of appellants. This decision results in our sustaining the
rejection of claims 1, 4-9 and 11, but not sustaining the
rejection of claims 2, 3, 10, 12, 14, 23 and 24. Accordingly,
the decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1-12, 14, 23 and
24 is affirmed-in-part.
-12-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007