Appeal 2006-2744
Application 09/664,794
Patent 5,584,962
claim 36 and were added to claim 10 of the '962 patent for purposes of
securing its allowance" (Br. 6).
Findings of Fact Relevant to Issue (2)
9. On September 19, 2000, the subject reissue application was filed, and, on
December 20, 2000, a Preliminary Amendment was filed presenting claims
36-48 to an apparatus and a method for processing a master.
10. On March 2, 2001, claims 36-48 were rejected over the above-
mentioned Brink '728 patent alone and further in view of other prior art.
11. On May 14, 2001, an interview was held between the Examiner and the
Appellants' representative wherein the Examiner stated that proposed claims
were patentable over the prior art of record because "the prior art does not
teach the concept of manually engaging the upper outer shell portion directly
and lifting the upper outer shell portion directly to the open position"
(Interview Summary 3). The Examiner further stated that "[t]he closest prior
art reference of Brink (U.S. Patent No. 4,619,728) employs a thumb screw
21 and thus the user does not manually engage the upper outer shell portion
directly in the manner claimed by the applicant[s]" (id.).
12. On May 16, 2001, in response to this interview, the Appellants filed
amended claims 36-48 which correspond to the claims on appeal (and
presumably correspond to the claims proposed in the May 14, 2001
interview).
13. Thereafter, the prior art rejections based on the Brink patent were not
applied against these claims.
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013