Appeal 2006-2056
Application 10/102,192
12. Equipment for use in playing a card game comprising:
only one deck of cards; and
said at least one deck of cards having fours [sic, four]
suits only with cards numbered 2 to 10 in each suit and with an ace in
each suit.
The references of record relied upon by the Examiner as evidence of
anticipation and obviousness are:
Webb US 5,685,774 Nov. 11, 1997
Adams US 5,743,798 Apr. 28, 1998
Baerlocher US 6,435,970 B1 Aug. 20, 2002
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as
based on a disclosure which does not provide written description support for
the claimed subject matter.
Claims 3 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as indefinite.
Claims 12-14 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as
anticipated by Webb.
Claims 17-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable
over Webb in view of Adams.
Claim 15 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Webb in view of Baerlocher.
Claim 20 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Adams in view of Baerlocher.
ISSUES
The following issues are before us on appeal. First, whether claim 1
is based on a Specification that does not provide written description support
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013