Ex parte AYERS et al. - Page 11

          Appeal No. 1998-2606                                                        
          Application 08/446,415                                                      

          35 U.S.C.  103 of the combined teachings of Long and Fales,                
          we do not sustain the rejection of claims 14 and 15 for the                 
          reasons set forth by appellants in the brief since the                      
          combination of the two references provides no teachings or                  
          suggestions that the rotatable disc 30 in Fales is made of                  
          metal as required by claim 14 on appeal.  On the other hand,                
          we do sustain the rejection of claim 16 since the showing in                
          Figure 2 of Fales indicates that a transparent window 36 has                
          an image thereon.  The additional reliance upon Whittlesey as               
          to dependent claim 17 in a separate rejection merely                        
          buttresses that showing already depicted in Figure 2 of Fales               
          of the opaque nature of the coating disposed thereon to form                
          the image.  Whittlesey utilizes a discontinuous coating 24 to               
          provide the basis of the desired symbols or markings 25 on the              
          transparent plate 20 in the Figure 2 showing.                               


Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007