Appeal No. 1999-1718
Application 08/786,742
unpatentable over Williams in view of White.
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Williams in view of Carney.
Claims 6, 8, 9, 12 through 14, 16 through 19 and 21 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Williams in view of Groff.
Attention is directed to the appellants’ main and reply
briefs (Paper Nos. 10 and 12) and to the examiner’s answer
(Paper No. 11) for the respective positions of the appellants
and the examiner with regard to the merits of these
rejections.
DISCUSSION
Williams, the examiner’s primary reference, discloses a
debris clearing apparatus of the sort recited in the appealed
claims. The apparatus includes a pair of notched clearing
discs 112 having respective forward reaches which, as shown in
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007