Appeal No. 1999-2556
Application 08/774,848
Claims 3, 10 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as being unpatentable over Manning in view of Watson
and Rhodes.
Claim 18 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Manning in view of Watson and Clark.
Claims 19 and 43 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Manning in view of Watson and
Weldon.
Claim 45 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Watson in view of Weldon.
Attention is directed to the appellant’s brief (Paper No.
16) and to the examiner’s final rejection and answer (Paper
Nos. 14 and 17) for the respective positions of the appellant
and the examiner with regard to the merits of these
rejections.
DISCUSSION
Watson, applied to support the anticipation rejection of
claim 44, discloses an exterminator for rodents and insects.
This exterminator consists of a base 1, a lure compartment 6a
formed by a cylindrical wall 6 disposed on the base, poison
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007