Appeal No. 2001-0180
Application No. 08/887,421
Official Notice taken by the examiner “of the old and
conventional practice in the art of rafts of using any of a
variety of art recognized equivalent fastening or tethering
mechanisms for holding the raft in place, such as for example
grommets for receiving straps or ropes to secure the raft”
(Examiner’s Answer, Paper No. 15, page 5)
THE REJECTION
Claims 1, 2, 4 through 6, 8 and 17 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Curcio in view
of the Official Notice taken by the examiner.
Attention is directed to the appellants’ main and reply
briefs (Paper Nos. 14 and 16) and to the examiner’s answer
(Paper No. 15) for the respective positions of the appellants
and the examiner with regard to the merits of this rejection.1
DISCUSSION
I. Grouping of claims
On page 3 in the main brief, the appellants state that
“[t]he claims stand or fall together.” Therefore, pursuant to
1In the final rejection (Paper No. 10), claims 1 through
8 and 17 stood rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph,
as being indefinite. The examiner has since withdrawn this
rejection upon reconsideration (see page 2 in the answer).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007