Appeal No. 2006-0476
Application No. 10/365,258
under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Newhouse. Claim 33 is
dependent upon 32 and we similarly will not sustain the examiner’s rejection.
Rejection of claim 34
On page 3 of the answer, the examiner rejects claim 34 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 as being anticipated by Newhouse. Claim 34 is dependent upon claim 12.
The examiner has not asserted, nor do we find that claim 12 is anticipated by
Newhouse. As claim 34 necessarily includes all of the limitations of claim 12, we
will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 34 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as
being anticipated by Newhouse.
Rejections based upon Fox
Fox teaches a keyboard tray assembly, item 10, with a housing, item 30,
for an instruction card, item 32. The card assembly includes a spacer plate, item
31, which has two shoulders, item 50. See column 4, lines 45 through 64 and
figure 4. The instruction card item 32 also has two lugs or stops, items 58. See
column 5, lines 19 through 30 and figure 5. Removal of the card is prevented by
the interaction of the shoulders of the spacer plate and the lugs on the card. See
column 6, lines 46 through 48.
Rejection of claim 12 through 15, 17, 19, 20 and 34.
Appellants argue on page 10 of the brief, that Fox does not teach the
claim 12 limitation of “at least one support structure for supporting said label …
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007