Appeal No. 2004-2114 Page 2
Application No. 09/808,122
The appellant's invention relates to a cranial nerve clock and watch
(specification, p. 2). A copy of the claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to
the appellant's brief.
The prior art
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Crow et al. (Crow) D365,287 Dec. 19, 1995
Fontaine D378,741 Apr. 8, 1997
The rejections
Claims 1 to 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Fontaine or Crow.
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. 10, mailed 10/2/03) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to the brief (Paper No. 9, filed 7/1/03) for the appellant's arguments
thereagainst.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007