Appeal No. 2001-0291 Page 3
Application No. 08/772,559
Martin et al. (Martin) 2,536,760 Jan. 2, 1951
Brown et al. (Brown) 3,214,142 Oct. 26, 1965
Claims 1-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly
point out and distinctly claim that which appellants regard as
their invention.
Claims 1-12 and 14-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Brown.
Claims 1-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Brown.
Claims 1-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Martin.
Claims 1-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Martin.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the final rejection and
answer (Paper Nos. 13 and 20) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections and to the brief (Paper
No. 19) for the appellants' arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007