Appeal No. 2001-2288
Application 09/175,570
the underlying specification, redundant or otherwise
indefinite.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, rejection of claims 1, 2, 6, 9 and
11.
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejections
Snider discloses a mouse trap assembly comprising a frame
1 formed of a horizontal base plate 2 and a vertical wall 3
extending upwardly therefrom, a plurality of horizontally
spaced apertures 4 in the wall, pairs of guides 16 on the base
plate
respectively aligned with the apertures, a trap 6 received
between each pair of guides, and a resilient clip 24 mounted
adjacent one end of the vertical wall for latching engagement
with an adjacent frame. The traps 6 have spring-biased jaws
adapted to be triggered by rodents passing through the
apertures in the vertical wall of the frame.
According to the examiner (see page 5 in the answer),
Snider responds to all of the limitations in claim 1 except
for the one requiring the traps to be “adhesive” traps. The
examiner turns to McQueen for this feature. McQueen discloses
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007