Appeal No. 2001-2421
Application No. 09/092,577
The Examiner relies on the following references in rejecting
the claims:
Miller et al (Miller) 5,099,399 Mar. 24, 1992
Scrivo 4,579,419 Apr. 1, 1986
Declaration of Assignee signed by Brad B. Heckerman on
September 24, 1998 (Paper No. 5, filed November 9, 1998).
Claims 1-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Appellants’ statement that the invention was
entered into a sale contract.
Claims 9 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Scrivo.
Claims 1-7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Miller.
Claims 11-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Scrivo in view of Miller.
Claims 17 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Scrivo or Miller.
We make reference to the answer (Paper No. 17, mailed April
24, 2001) for the Examiner’s reasoning, and to the appeal brief
(Paper No. 14, filed November 24, 2000) and the reply brief
(Paper No. 18, filed May 21, 2001) for Appellants’ arguments
thereagainst.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007