Appeal No. 2001-1803
Application No. 09/087,775
The references applied by the examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Hamilton 2,656,881 Oct. 27, 1953
Goldman et al. (Goldman) Des. 176,183 Nov. 29, 1955
Good 3,271,075 Sep. 06, 1966
Jakobsen 3,326,148 Jun. 20, 1967
Borichevsky Des. 278,864 May 21, 1985
Ruda et al. (Ruda) 4,548,294 Oct. 22, 1985
Lyons Des. 363,824 Nov. 07, 1995
Muller-Deisig et al. (Muller-Deisig) Des. 379,887 Jun. 17, 1997
The appealed claims stand rejected on the following grounds:
(1) Claim 28, unpatentable for failure to comply with 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph;2
(2) Claims 1, 3, 5, 11 to 13 and 18, anticipated by Borichevsky under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b);
(3) Claims 2, 4, 6 to 17 and 19 to 29, unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
follows:
(a) Claims 4, 6, 7 and 9, unpatentable over Borichevsky;
(b) Claims 2, 8, and 10, unpatentable over Borichevsky in view of Hamilton;
(c) Claims 12 to 14, unpatentable over Borichevsky in view of Good
or Ruda;
(d) Claims 15 and 16, unpatentable over Borichevsky in view of Lyons;
(e) Claim 19, unpatentable over Borichevsky in view of Muller-Deisig;
(f) Claims 6, 7, 9, 11, 15 and 17, unpatentable over Goldman in view
of Borichevsky;
A rejection of claims 1 to 27 under this section of the statute is not repeated in the examiner’s2
answer, claims 1 and 20 having been amended subsequent to Paper No. 12.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007