Appeal 2007-1555
Application 09/900,442
Snyder US 5,752,291 May 19, 1998
Fehr US 6,138,413 Oct. 31, 2000
The following rejections are before us for review.
1. Claims 1-3 and 8-13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Headrick in view of Fehr, Hellstrom, and Snyder.
2. Claims 4-7 and 40-44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Headrick in view of Fehr, Hellstrom, and Snyder as applied
to claims 1-3 and 8-13 above, and further in view of Taber.
3. Claims 14 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Headrick in view of Fehr, Hellstrom, and Snyder as applied to claims 1-3
and 8-13.
4. Claims 47 and 48 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Headrick in view of Fehr, Hellstrom, and Kurtz.
ISSUES
The first issue before us is whether Appellants have sustained their burden
of showing that the Examiner erred in rejecting the claims on appeal as being
unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Headrick, Fehr, Taber, Hellstrom, and
Snyder in that, as alleged by Appellants, there is no teaching, suggestion, or
motivation to combine these references as proposed by the Examiner.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013