Smith Appeal No. 2002-1817 Page 2
Application No. 09/432,862
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a pet door. An understanding of the
invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which was been
reproduced below.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Smith 4,043,079 Aug. 23,1977
Ruff 4,255,902 Mar. 17,1981
De La Cerda et al. (De La Cerda) 5,992,096 Nov. 30,1999
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Smith in view of De La Cerda.
Claims 4 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Smith in view of De La Cerda and Ruff.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer
(Paper No. 8) and the first office action (Paper No. 4) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the Brief (Paper No. 7) for the appellant's
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007