Appeal Number: 2006-1404
Application Number: 09/571,803
OPINION
The rejections are affirmed as to claims 1, 2, 4,1 6,2 7, 9,
12, 13, 15-17, 19, 21-25, 27-29, 31 and 32, and reversed as to
claims 5, 10, 11, 14, 26 and 30.
The appellant states that the claims stand or fall in the
following groups: 1) claims 1, 2, 7, 9, 13, 17, 19 and 21,
2) claims 5, 26 and 30; 3) claims 4 and 16, 4) claims 10, 11
and 14, 5) claims 6, 12 and 15, 6) claims 22, 25 and 29,
7) claims 23, 27 and 31, and 8) claims 24, 28 and 32 (brief,
page 5). Hence, we limit our discussions of the claims for
which the rejections are affirmed to one claim in each group,
i.e., claims 1, 4, 12, 22, 23 and 24. See
37 CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)(2004).
Rejections over Reussenzehn, alone
or in combination with van Berkel
Claim 1
Reussenzehn discloses a slicer having a slicer body, a tray
and a handle that appears to be fastened to two pieces extending
from the tray (figures 3 and 4).
Van Berkel discloses a slicer having a handle (29) secured
to a table (11) (page 1, lines 68-69).
1 The rejections of claims 4 and 16 over Reussenzehn, alone or in combination
with van Berkel are affirmed, but the other rejections of those claims are
reversed.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007