Appeal No. 2003-1915 Page 2
Application No. 09/423,232
BACKGROUND
The appellants’ invention relates to a device for compressing a stack of objects
such as sheets of paper. An understanding of the invention can be derived from a
reading of exemplary claim 82, which appears in the appendix to the Brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Hahne et al. (Hahne ‘546) 5,868,546 Feb. 9, 1999
Hahne et al. (Hahne ‘257) 6,015,257 Jan. 18, 2000
(filed Oct. 5, 1995)
Hahne et al. (Hahne ‘651) 6,102,651 Aug. 15, 2000
(filed Apr. 16, 1996)
Claims 82-90 and 93-103 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Hahne ‘651 in view of Hahne ‘257.1
Claims 82, 91, 92 and 103 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Hahne ‘546 in view of Hahne ‘651 and Hahne ‘257.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer
(Paper No. 19) and the final rejection (Paper No. 16) for the examiner's complete
1Claim 93 was not included in the statement of either of the rejections. Since claim 93 depends
from claim 89, we shall consider it as inadvertently being omitted from this one of the rejections.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007