Appeal No. 2006-3370
Application No. 10/444,736
The examiner relies on the following references:
Jondole US 2,744,334 May 8, 1956
Williams US 4,237,614 Dec. 9, 1980
Payne US 5,490,334 Feb. 13, 1996
I. Claims 1, 5-7, 9, 11, and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 as being
unpatentable over Payne and Williams.
II. Claims 7, 9, and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103 as being
unpatentable over Payne, Williams, and Jondole.
We refer to the Final Rejection (mailed Jul. 14, 2004) and the Examiner=s Answer
(mailed Dec. 9, 2005) for a statement of the examiner=s position and to the Brief (filed
Aug. 17, 2005) for appellant=s position with respect to the claims which stand rejected.
OPINION
At the outset, we observe that instant claim 1 (with claims 5-7, 9, and 10
depending) could have been rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 112, second paragraph as
being indefinite, in that Asaid distance of said standard furring strip@ lacks proper
antecedent basis in the claim. The error appears to have been introduced by an
amendment filed June 1, 2004, in which appellant changed the claim 1 recitation of Ahalf
a distance of a standard furring strip@ to Ahalf a width of a standard furring strip,@ without
changing the last occurrence of Asaid distance@ in the claim. In this decision on appeal,
however, we will consider all of, but only, the arguments that appellant provides in
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013