Appeal No. 1997-1632 Page 4
Application No. 08/138,555
(“Walton '068"). Claims 49, 53, and 54 stand rejected under § 103 as obvious over
Roland in view of Tolson further in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,531,237 (“Bar-on”) even
further in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,469,917 (“Shelley”). Claims 52 and 63-66 stand
rejected under § 103 as obvious over either Roland, Mauch '393, or U.S. Patent No.
4,721,954 (“Mauch '954") in view of Tolson further in view of Bar-on. Claim 58 stands
rejected under § 103 as obvious over either Roland, Mauch '393, or U.S. Patent No.
4,218,690 (“Ulch”) in view of Tolson further in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,609,780 (“Clark
'780"). Claim 62 stands rejected under § 103 as obvious over Roland in view of Tolson
further in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,600,829 (“Walton '829"). Claim 67 stands rejected
under § 103 as obvious over Roland in view of Tolson further in view of U.S. Patent No.
4,831,374 (“Masel”).
Claim 68 stands rejected under § 103 as obvious over (Mauch '393) in view of
Tolson. Claim 69 stands rejected under § 103 as obvious over either Mauch '393 or
Ulch in view of Tolson further in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,829,296 (“Clark '296"). Claim
70 stands rejected under § 103 as obvious over either Roland, Mauch '393, or Ulch in
view of Tolson further in view of Clark '780. Claim 71 stands rejected under
§ 103 as obvious over either Roland, Mauch '393, or (Mauch '954) in view of Tolson
further in view of Bar-on. Claim 72 stands rejected under § 103 as obvious over
Roland in view of Tolson further in view of Masel.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007