Appeal No. 97-2713
Application 08/373,069
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Barkley in view of Tulleners.
6. Claims 29 and 34 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Barkley in view of Anderson.
Reference is made to the examiner’s answer for details of
these rejections.
With regard to the examiner’s § 102(b) rejection of claim
1, the Barkley patent discloses a watercraft having a pair of
pontoon hulls 16 supporting a central hull 12 and a transport
unit in the form of a superstructure 32 on the deck 30 of the
central hull. Legs 14 attaching the pontoon hulls 19 to the
central hull are pivotally secured to the central hull by
pivots 46. Each leg 14 and its associated pontoon hull 19 are
swingable as a unit about the associated pivot 46 by a
hydraulic ram 58 to the positions shown in Figures 3-6 of the
patent drawings.
Appellant does not dispute the examiner’s finding that
Barkley’s pontoon hulls 16 define a unit which is disposed in
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007