Appeal 2007-0009
Application 10/345,461
1 post cap. However, from our review of the reference, we find that Cain
2 describes a lock on a gate post, to prevent the gate from being opened, and
3 does not describe a cap on the fence post, or that the lock is to prevent the
4 fence rails from being stolen. Accordingly, we find that the teachings and
5 suggestions of Cain fail to make up for the basic deficiencies of the prior art
6 applied against claim 1.
7 DECISION
8 The Examiner's rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, and 5 under 35 U.S.C.
9 § 103(a) is Reversed.
10
11 REVERSED
12
13
14
15
16
17 vsh
18
19
20
21
22 William S. Dorman
23 830 Beacon Building
24 406 South Boulder
25 Tulsa OK 74103
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Last modified: September 9, 2013