Appeal No. 1998-0502 Page 3
Application No. 08/571,323
Miller 845,717 Feb. 26,
1907
Andersen 3,908,488 Sep. 30,
1975
Wright et al. (Wright) 5,284,073 Feb. 8,
1994
Ruzicka et al. (Ruzicka) 5,388,486 Feb.
14, 1995
Claims 1 through 6, 8 through 10, 12, 13 and 20 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Wright in view of Blaha. 1
Claims 7, 11 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Wright in view of Blaha and further
in view of Andersen.
Claim 16 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Wright in view of Blaha and further in view
of Ruzicka.
1Both Appellant and the Examiner acknowledge claims 1-20
as currently under rejection. Although not specifically
recited in the rejection, we will include claims 14 and 15 as
meant to be in this rejection. The language of claim 14
mirrors the language found in claim 1, and the language of
claim 15 mirrors the language of claim 5. Since claims 1, 5
and 13 (base claim of claims 14 and 15) all fall under this
rejection, it is logical to include claims 14 and 15 here.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007