Appeal No. 2005-0642
Application No. 09/568,278
40. The Examiner held that it would have been obvious to provide the
hinge of Surawara with the pins and oblong slots of Seevers in order to provide for
axial adjustment of the latching part for easier connection between the male and
female elements.
41. The Examiner advised applicant that claims 7-9 would be allowable if
written in independent form to include all the limitations of the claims from which
they depend.
42. On August 5, 1996, applicant filed an amendment responding to the
Examiner's first Office action.
43. As shown in Appendix 3 of this opinion, the amendment:
(1) canceled claims 7, 17, and 18;
(2) added new claims 19 and 20; and
(3) amended claims 1, 4, 8-10, and 16.
44. After entry of the amendment, the application claims were 1-6, 8-16,
19, and 20.
45. In the amendment, applicant stated as follows:
Claim 4 has been rewritten to include the limitations of
dependent claim 7, and dependent claim 7 has been cancelled. Claims
- 10 -
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007