Appeal No. 1999-1050 Page 2
Application No. 08/440,458
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to a method of mitigating seismic forces on a
structure (claims 1-5 and 7-9) and a support system for a structure (claims 11, 13-15 and
17). An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim
1, which appears in the appendix to the appellants' Brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Buckle 4,593,502 Jun. 10, 1986
Csák 4,651,481 Mar. 24, 1987
Fukahori et al. 4,830,927 May 16, 1989
(Fukahori)
The following rejections stand under 35 U.S.C. § 103:
(1) Claims 1-5, 7-9 and 17 on the basis of Csák and Buckle.
(2) Claims 11 and 13-15 on the basis of Csák.
(3) Claim 15 on the basis of Csák and Fukahori.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer (Paper
No. 14) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the Brief
(Paper No. 13) for the appellants' arguments thereagainst.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007