Appeal No. 2005-0141
Application No. 09/656,683
The following rejections are before us for review.
Claims 1, 3, 6, and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Beavers in view of Balsells.
Claims 2, 5, 8, 9, and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Beavers in view of Balsells,
as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Nogle.
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Beavers in view of Balsells, as applied to
claim 1 above, further in view of Ide.
Claim 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Beavers in view of Balsells and Nogle, as
applied to claims 8 and 12 above, further in view of Ide.
The full text of the examiner’s rejections and response to
the argument presented by appellant appears in the answer mailed
October 1, 2002, while the complete statement of appellant’s
argument can be found in the main brief filed August 5, 2002 and
the reply brief filed October 10, 2002.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007