Appeal No. 2005-0880 3
Application No. 09/963,815
Attention is directed to the main and reply briefs (filed
March 11, 2004 and June 7, 2004) and the final rejection and
answer (mailed July 16, 2003 and May 27, 2004) for the respective
positions of the appellant and examiner regarding the merits of
this rejection.
DISCUSSION
Since the appellant has not argued separately the
patentability of any particular claim apart from the others, all
of the appealed claims shall stand or fall with representative
claim 1 (see In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 590, 18 USPQ2d 1089, 1091
(Fed. Cir. 1991); In re Wood, 582 F.2d 638, 642, 199 USPQ 137,
140 (CCPA 1978)).
The following passage from the appellant’s specification
describes the admitted prior art fuel tank system:
Referring to FIG. 5, another system of the prior
art is illustrated pictorially where a fuel tank la has
a filler tube 4a with an enlarged cup-shaped upper end
portion 5a shown with refueling nozzle 3a received
therein and having the end thereof inserted in closely
fitting arrangement in the upper end of the filler tube
4a. The lower end of the filler tube 4a extends into
the fuel tank and has a one-way valve 6a provided
thereon to permit fuel to enter the tank but not filler
neck 4a. The tank has a float operated vent valve 7a
provided in the top thereof and registered thereagainst
by flange 8a with the valve 7a extending through an
access opening into the tank for sensing the fuel level
indicated generally at 14a.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007