Appeal No. 1998-2011
Application No. 08/707,267
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to an electrical heater for a mold. An understanding of
the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which appears in the
appendix to the appellant's brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed
claims are:
Churchill Re 30,126 Oct. 23, 19791
Harpster et al. (Harpster) 1,667,857 May 1, 1928
Fessenden 4,197,449 Apr. 8, 1980
Bauchert et al. (Bauchert) 4,263,577 Apr. 21, 1981
Porzky 4,575,619 Mar. 11, 1986
Schwarzkopf 4,593,182 Jun. 3, 1986
German Utility Model 9,217,183.4 G Apr. 1, 19932,3
(the German reference)
The following rejections are before us for review.
(1) Claims 1, 7 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the
German reference in view of Bauchert.
1Reissue of U.S. Pat. No. 3,982,099, issued September 21, 1976.
2We derive our understanding of this reference from an English translation prepared for the PTO in 1995, a
copy of which is appended hereto.
3 This reference is discussed on page 3 of the appellant's specification. However, there is no indication in
the application file as to whether the appellant or the examiner supplied the copy of the document and the translation
thereof placed in the application file. Additionally, it does not appear that this reference has been officially made of
record by citation in an information disclosure statement or notice of references cited (Form PTO-892). The
examiner should take appropriate action to clarify the record and correct this informality.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007