Ex Parte MIMLITCH et al - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2002-2341                                                        
          Application 09/466,277                                                      


          Claims 1 through 32, 37 through 41 and 48 through 50 have been              
          canceled.                                                                   


          Appellants’ invention relates to a method for assembling a                  
          cardcage for accommodating circuit cards of electronic components           
          or integrated circuit packages.  Independent claims 51 and 52 are           
          representative of the subject matter on appeal and a copy of                
          those claims can be found in Appendix A of appellants’ brief.               


          The prior art references of record relied upon by the                       
          examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:                              
          Howrilka                           3,271,626      Sept.  6, 1966            
          Marks                              3,470,420      Sept. 30, 1969            
          Straccia et al. (Straccia)         3,696,936      Oct.  10, 1972            
          DeWilde                            5,202,816      Apr.  13, 1993            
          Watanabe et al. (Watanabe)2        04-044297A     Feb.  14, 1992            
          (Japanese Patent)                                                           




               1(...continued)                                                        
          entered.  Correction of this oversight is necessary during any              
          further prosecution of this application before the examiner.                

               2 Our understanding of this foreign language document is               
          based on a translation prepared by the US PTO Translations Branch           
          on May 30, 2002.  Since it is not clear from the examiner’s                 
          answer whether appellants’ were provided with a copy of this                
          translation, we have attached a copy to this decision.                      
                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007