Appeal No. 2000-2116 Page 2
Application No. 09/246,460
BACKGROUND
The appellants’ invention relates to a feedgate for controlling the flow of materials
exiting from an opening in the rear wall of a receptacle such as a truck body. An
understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 58, which
appears in the appendix to the Brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Park 842,238 Jan. 29, 1907
Clark 3,097,771 Jul. 16, 1963
Tobias 3,768,737 Oct. 30, 1973
Claims 58-75 and 88-100 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the
subject matter which the appellants regard as the invention.
Claims 76-80, 82, 83 and 88-98 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Tobias in view of Park.
Claims 81, 99 and 100 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Tobias in view of Park and Clark.
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
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007