Appeal No. 2005-1329 6
Application No. 10/187,038
the examiner in Bullard is a thin-walled device designed to rupture shortly after the
ignition of the propellant within the case (1) and therefore does, at least broadly,
constitute a “burst cup.”
Based on the foregoing, we will sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 1 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a). In accordance with appellant’s grouping of claims set forth on page
5 of the brief, dependent claims 2 through 4 will fall with parent claim 1.
Thus, the decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through 4 of the present
application under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is affirmed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007