Appeal No. 97-4155
Application No. 08/309,403
(see Figures 1 and 2). No hauling means for sliding the
equipment on a tilted ramp is necessary.
We fail to perceive any teaching, suggestion or incentive
in either of the references which would have led one of
ordinary skill in the art to modify the Filipoff system in the
manner proposed by the examiner. To support the truck body of
Filipoff on a pair of legs would destroy the essence of the
Filipoff invention which, in our view, would have acted as a
disincentive to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the
change. In addition, neither of the references incorporates
the loading concept expressed in the claim, and therefore even
if they were properly to be combined, the structure recited in
claim 12 would not have been suggested. That is, whereas
Filipoff teaches no overlapping of the truck ramp and the
equipment to be loaded and sliding the equipment over the
entire length of the ramp, and Tarrant teaches full
overlapping and no sliding, in the claimed invention there is
partial overlapping and partial sliding.
For the above reasons, it is our conclusion that the
combined teachings of Filipoff and Tarrant fail to establish a
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007