Ex parte DAVIES - Page 2




                Appeal No. 2001-1493                                                                                Page 2                    
                Application No. 09/109,016                                                                                                    


                application, stand withdrawn from further consideration under 37 CFR § 1.142(b) as being                                      
                directed to a non-elected invention.                                                                                          
                                                             BACKGROUND                                                                       
                         The appellant's invention relates to a punch for adapting oversized (e.g., legal                                     
                sized) paper for storage in standard sized (e.g., letter sized) ring binders.  A copy of the                                  
                claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellant's brief.                                                    
                         The examiner relied upon the following prior art references of record in rejecting the                               
                appealed claims:                                                                                                              
                Yerkes                                    3,073,199                                 Jan. 15, 1963                             
                Piazze                                    3,274,869                                 Sep. 27, 1966                             
                Szanto et al. (Szanto)                    4,354,405                                 Oct.  19, 1982                            
                         The following rejections are before us for review.                                                                   
                (1)      Claim 10 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being unpatentable over                                         
                Yerkes.                                                                                                                       
                (2)      Claims 12, 14, 15, 17, 20, 21, 24 and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)                                     
                as being unpatentable over Yerkes in view of Szanto.                                                                          
                (3)      Claims 11 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable                                       
                over Yerkes in view of Szanto and Piazze.                                                                                     













Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007