Appeal No. 2005-1708 Page 2
Application No. 10/370,122
The fixing component comprises a base 4 with a centering extension 5, a stem 3 and a
fork 2 with fixing holes forged as one piece. A copy of the claims under appeal is set
forth in the appendix to the appellants’ brief.
The Applied Prior Art
The examiner relied upon the following prior art references of record as evidence
of anticipation and obviousness in rejecting the appealed claims:
Finn et al. (Finn) 4,377,298 Mar. 22, 1983
Niaura et al. (Niaura) 6,318,521 Nov. 20, 2001
The Rejections
The following rejections are before us for review.
Claims 1 and 3-5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated
by Niaura.
Claims 6-8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Niaura.
Claim 2 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Niaura in view of Finn.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer
(mailed October 19, 2004) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007