Appeal No. 2003-0065
Application 09/491,284
body, Brezoczky is relied on to show a separate thin sheet 52
attached to a slider body 56. Kubo teaches that the sliding
surface can be spaced from the front edge of the slider and we
agree with the examiner that it would have been obvious to space
the thin sheet 52 in Brezoczky, which forms the sliding surface,
from the front edge of the slider body 56 in view of Kubo.
Appellant has provided no reasons why it would have been
unobvious to space the thin sheet 52 in Brezoczky from the front
edge of the slider body 56. The rejection of claim 27 is
sustained.
Obviousness - Brezoczky, Kubo, and Fukuoka
Claims 28 and 29
Appellants argue that claims 28 and 29 distinguish over
Brezoczky for the reasons mentioned for claim 27 (Br14). This
does not constitute a separate argument for patentability. The
rejection of claims 28 and 29 is sustained.
Obviousness - Brezoczky, Kubo, and Saitoh
Claim 30
Appellants argue that claim 30 distinguishes over Brezoczky
for the reasons mentioned for claim 27 (Br13). This does not
constitute a separate argument for patentability of claim 30.
The rejection of claim 30 is sustained.
- 21 -
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007