Appeal No. 2001-0106
Application 08/855,811
Iliou et al. (Iliou) 4,616,413 Oct. 14, 1986
(filed Jul. 9, 1985)
Bruder (Bruder) 4,502,903 Mar. 5, 1985
(filed Jun. 4, 1984)
In formulating our opinion, we rely upon the following additional newly cited
references:
Stow (Stow) 4,568,602 Feb. 4, 1986
(filed Aug. 2, 1984)
Tollefson et al. (Tollefson) 4,569,877 Feb. 11, 1986
(filed Apr. 15, 1985).
THE REJECTIONS
Given the complex nature of the rejection noted at Page 7, lines 1-4, of the
Examiner’s Answer, we have organized the rejections below and expressly restated the
rejections including the Hahn reference as an additional reference.
Rejection (A) Claims 1, 3, 5, 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by, and alternatively, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Thomson.
Rejection (B) Claims 1, 3, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by, and alternatively, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Pleuddemann or Hahn.
Rejection (C) Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable
over Iliou in view of Thomson.
Rejection (D) Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Iliou in view of either Pleuddemann or Hahn.
Rejection (E) Claims 1, 3, 5, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Bruder in view of Thomson.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007