Ex parte LONG et al. - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2001-2213                                                                  Page 2                
              Application No. 09/399,418                                                                                  


                                                    BACKGROUND                                                            
                     The appellants' invention relates to tools that are useful for sanding corners in                    
              rooms that have been roughed out with drywall materials and optionally plaster to cover                     
              joints between drywall materials (specification, p. 1).  A copy of the claims under appeal is               
              set forth in the appendix to the appellants' brief.                                                         


                     The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                      
              appealed claims are:                                                                                        
              Burtch et al. (Burtch)              3,707,059                   Dec. 26, 1972                               
              Walsh                               5,337,523                   Aug. 16, 1994                               



                     Claims 1 to 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over                        
              Walsh in view of Burtch.                                                                                    


                     Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the                    
              appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the answer (Paper                      
              No. 11, mailed April 10, 2001) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the                      
              rejection, and to the brief (Paper No. 10, filed February 2, 2001) for the appellants'                      
              arguments thereagainst.                                                                                     









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

Last modified: November 3, 2007