Application of Alfred R. Conti and Daniel J. Menter

ALMOND, Judge.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals affirming the examiner’s rejection of appellants’ claims 35 and 36 as unpatentable over prior art. No other claims remain in appellants’ application 1 entitled “Cutting Tool.”

Appellants state in their brief that claim 35 is the only claim to be dealt withi inasmuch as “Claim 36 depends therefrom, and simply defines certain cam and clamp structure more specifically tham Claim 35.”

Claim 35 reads as follows:

“In a cutting tool, a body provided' with a flat support surface and fixed locator portions extending transversely of…