Appeal No. 2005-2435
Application No. 10/407,498
Allred 5,529,145 June 25, 1996
Micro Mark Catalogue, "Ratchet Action Clamps", (date unknown: cited
by applicant), page 65
Claim 13 is rejected under the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C.
§ 112 for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim
the subject matter which the appellant regards as his intention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-10 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Allred.
Claims 4, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Allred, and claim 6 is
correspondingly rejected over this reference and further in view
of Micro Mark Catalogue.
We refer to the brief and reply brief and to the answer for
a complete discussion of the contrary viewpoints expressed by
the appellant and by the examiner concerning these rejections.
OPINION
For the reasons which follow, we cannot sustain any of the
rejections advanced by the examiner in this appeal.
The examiner considers dependent claim 13 to violate the
second paragraph of § 112 because, in his view, it is unclear
whether this claim is intended to be drawn to a "safety device"
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007