Appeal No. 2000-1616
Application 08/698,054
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellants’ specification and claims,
to the applied prior art references, and to the respective
positions articulated by appellants and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we have made the determinations
which follow.
Before addressing the rejections on appeal, we observe
that appellants have indicated on page 3 of their brief that
“[n]o statement is made pursuant to 37 CFR 1.192(c)(7).”
Accordingly, we have selected claim 1 as being representative
of the issues on appeal and will decide the appeal on the
basis of that claim alone.
Looking to the examiner's rejection of claims 1, 3, 5, 6
and 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on Havins, Klammer and
Dewey, we agree with the examiner that Havins (e.g., in Fig.
8) discloses a mounting apparatus for mounting sonar
transducers on a boat, which apparatus includes a frame (207)
mountable to the boat, a column (143) supporting the submerged
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007