Appeal No. 2001-0628
Application No. 09/118,665
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 59 through 68, 70, 71, 75 through 80 and 84 through
91 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as
being based on a specification which fails to comply with the
written description requirement of this section of the statute.
Claims 59 through 68, 70, 71, 75 through 80 and 84 through
91 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as
being based on a specification which fails to comply with the
enablement requirement of this section of the statute.
Claims 59 through 68, 70, 71 75, 77 through 80 and 88
through 91 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Knuttel in view of either Shellock or Captain
Jack, and further in view of Cook.
Claims 69 and 72 through 74 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over either Shellock or Captain
Jack in view of Cook.
Attention is directed to the brief (Paper No. 12) and answer
(Paper No. 13) for the respective positions of the appellants and
examiner regarding the merits of these rejections.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007