Appeal No. 2005-1329 2
Application No. 10/187,038
Independent claim 1 is representative of the subject matter on appeal, and a
copy of that claim can be found in the Appendix to appellant’s brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are:
Hotchkiss 99,899 Feb. 15, 1870
Bullard 278,394 May 29, 1883
Tucker 3,983,817 Oct. 5, 1976
Brown 3065 Jan. 1872
(British Patent)
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Bullard in view of Hotchkiss.
Claims 2 and 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Bullard in view of Hotchkiss as combined above, and further in view of Tucker.
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Bullard in view of Hotchkiss and Tucker as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view
of Brown.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007