Appeal No. 2006-0863 Παγε 2 Application No. 10/323,325 THE PRIOR ART The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are: Adams 1,253,455 Jan. 15, 1918 Winslow 1,796,698 Mar. 17, 1931 Higuchi 3,358,340 Oct. 23, 1965 THE REJECTIONS Claims 1 to 3, 5, 7 to 12, 26 and 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Adams. Claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Adams in view of Higuchi. Claim 13 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Adams and Higuchi in view of Winslow. 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 December 1, 2004) and the supplemental answer (mailed May 25, 2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the brief (filed September 10, 2004) for the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007