Appeal No. 2004-0389 Page 2
Application No. 09/853,339
BACKGROUND
The appellants’ invention relates to a support structure for an escalator.
Appellants’ specification discloses several embodiments of the invention. In response
to an election of species requirement (Paper No. 5), appellants elected the embodiment
of Figure 11 (Paper No. 7). Further understanding of the invention may be obtained
from a reading of independent claim 1, which is reproduced, infra, in the opinion section
of this decision.
The examiner relied upon the following prior art references of record in rejecting
the appealed claims:
Pallinger et al. (Pallinger) 6,105,748 Aug. 22, 2000
Gschwendtner et al. (Gschwendtner) 6,374,981 Apr. 23, 2002
(filed Aug. 1, 2000)
The following rejections are before us for review.1
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by
Gschwendtner.
1 The withdrawal of claims 19-26 as not being directed to the elected species relates to a
petitionable matter and not to an appealable matter. See Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP)
§§ 1002 and 1201. Accordingly, we will not review the issue raised by appellants on pages 9 and 10 of the
brief.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007