Appeal No. 2001-0252
Application 08/760,652
examiner has indicated that claims 2, 3, 9 and 10 stand
allowed. Accordingly, the appeal as to those claims is
dismissed, leaving for our consideration on appeal claims 4
through 8, 11, 12, 21 through 23 and 30 through 32. Claims 1,
13 through 20, 24 through 29 and 33 through 40 have been
canceled.
Appellant’s invention relates to a transparency viewing
device or viewbox for holding and illuminating X-rays and like
transparencies. Independent claims 4, 21, 23, 30 and 31 are
representative of the subject matter on appeal and a copy of
those claims may be found in the Appendix to appellant’s
brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Krajian 2,722,762 Nov. 8,
1955
Geluk 4,637,150 Jan. 20,
1987
In making an obviousness-type double patenting rejection
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007