Appeal No. 1999-1744
Application No. 08/743,521
the final rejection on June 25, 1998 (Paper No. 7) has been
entered.
Appellant’s invention pertains to a fishing hook remover.
An understanding of the invention can be derived from a
reading of exemplary claim 2 which appears in an appendix to
appellant’s brief.
The references relied upon by the examiner in support of
the rejections are:
Lawrence 2,561,281 Jul. 17, 1951
Cripps et al. (Cripps) 4,342,171 Aug. 3, 1982
The following rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are before
us for review:1
(a) claims 2, 4, 10 and 11, unpatentable over Cripps in
view of Lawrence; and
(b) claims 12 and 13, being unpatentable over Cripps.
1In the final rejection, claims 2, 4 and 10-13 were also
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph. However, in
that the examiner indicated in the advisory letter mailed July
8, 1998 (Paper No. 8) that this rejection has been overcome by
the amendment filed subsequent to the final rejection, and in
that the rejection has not been repeated in the examiner’s
answer, it is not before us in this appeal.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007