Appeal No. 2001-0090 Page 3
Application No. 08/893,890
a discontinuity formed in the outer surface of the
center portion.
The prior art of record relied upon by the examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims is:
Bescoby et al. (Bescoby) 4,896,975 Jan. 30,
1990
In addition, the examiner also relied upon the appellant's
admission of prior art set forth in the preamble of claim 1
since claim 1 is drafted as a Jepson type claim in which the 2
preamble of the claim is an admission of prior art. Note, In
re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982). (Admitted
Prior Art)
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over the Admitted Prior Art in view of Bescoby.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejection, we make reference to the final rejection and the
answer for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
2 Ex parte Jepson, 1917 C.D. 62, 243 O.G. 525 (Ass't
Comm'r Pat. 1917), incorporated into the rules as 37 CFR §
1.75(e).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007