Appeal No. 2000-1998 Page 3
Application No. 08/828,523
Halstrom 5,365,945 Nov. 22, 1994
(filed Apr. 13, 1993)
Claims 28-34, 36-38, 45 and 47 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kelly in view of
Halstrom.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and the appellant regarding the above-noted
rejection, we make reference to the final rejection and answer
for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection
and to the brief and reply brief (Paper Nos. 30 and 33) for the
appellant’s arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, to the appellant’s
declaration under 37 CFR § 1.131 and attached exhibits (Paper No.
7 in the parent application), and to the respective positions
articulated by the appellant and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
Independent claims 28 and 45 each recite an oral appliance
comprising an upper arch including a downwardly extending post,
and a lower arch, the lower arch uncoupled from the upper arch
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007