Appeal No. 2006-0593 Page 3
Application No. 09/895,611
Applied Prior Art
Mankowich et al. (Mankowich) 3,347,971 Oct. 17, 1967
Bavers 3,596,324 Aug. 3, 1971
Von der Heide 3,683,062 Aug. 8, 1972
Pivar 3,825,395 Jul. 23, 1974
Friesen 4,695,244 Sep. 22, 1987
Pitavy et al. (Pitavy) 4,764,322 Aug. 16, 1988
Lin 5,035,601 Jul. 30, 1991
The Rejections
Claims 3, 4, 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by von der Heide.
Claims 3, 4, 6 and 7 also stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Pitavy in view of any one of Pivar, Lin, Bavers, Friesen, Mankowich
and von der Heide.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding this appeal, we make reference to the examiner's answer
(mailed June 1, 2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections
and to the appellant's brief (filed March 7, 2005) for the appellant's arguments
thereagainst.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007