Appeal No. 2001-0036
Application 08/971,611
support element and the stationary support element along a
bottom and at least one of a front and back of the movable
support element. As an alternative, the anti-friction element
may be in the form of a friction reducing layer disposed
between the moveable element and at least the bottom and front
walls of a groove on the stationary element (claim 16).
Independent claims 4, 11, 12 and 16 are representative of the
subject matter on appeal and a copy of those claims may be
found in the Appendix to appellants’ brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. §
103 are:
Bernard et al. (Bernard) 4,398,747 Aug.
16, 1983
Bogner 5,114,174 May 19,
1992
Challande et al. (Challande) 0 729 771 A12 Sept. 4, 1996
Claims 2, 4, 6, 7 through 10, 16, 18 and 19 stand
2Our understanding of this foreign language document is
based on a translation prepared for the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office. A copy of that translation is appended to
this decision.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007