Appeal No. 1998-3353
Application 08/692,711
Reexamination Certificate B1 5,570,616 issued on August
25, 1998 (copy attached).
2. A § 103 rejection of one or more of the appealed
claims utilizing the Gantz patent as the primary
reference.
3. A § 103 rejection of one or more of the appealed
claims utilizing the Froeschl patent as the primary
reference.
As one example of a possible double patenting
rejection, it appears that claim 21 in the instant
application differs from claim 1 in Patent No. 5,570,616
in that it more broadly recites that the pawl-engaging
element is an “actuator projection structure” whereas
claim 1 of Patent No. 5,570,616 recites that the pawl-
engaging element is an “actuator pin.” Froeschl, however,
teaches the use of
a pin as the structure that is mounted on the selector
member for directly engaging a selected pawl in a
selector and ratchet mechanism.
With regard to a possible § 103 rejection utilizing
Gantz as the primary reference and a possible § 103
rejection utilizing Froeschl as the primary reference,
the examiner should analyze Gantz and Froeschl to
determine the differences between each of these
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007