Appeal No. 2002-1778 Page 3
Application No. 09/285,078
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the final
rejection (Paper No. 7, mailed October 20, 2000) and the answer (Paper No. 15, mailed
February 21, 2002) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections,
and to the brief (Paper No. 13, filed July 20, 2001) and reply brief (Paper No. 16, filed
April 30, 2002) 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, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
The teachings of the applied prior art
Jacks
Jacks' invention relates to electric torch supports, devised mainly to facilitate the
manipulation of tools in darkness by a person working alone without the assistance of
another person to hold a lamp or torch. As shown in Figures 1-3, the electric torch
1(...continued)
a statement of the rejection with regards to only claims 2 to 5, we believe that the answer, taken as a whole,
maintains the rejections of claims 1 to 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as set forth in the final rejection.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007