Appeal No. 98-1256
Application No. 08/599,934
adds to limitation of claim 18 the provision of the handle having first and second ends with the first end
attached to the first riser and the second end extending away from the first riser. This is exactly the
arrangement that Anderson teaches in Fig. 3. Illustrated therein is a handle (the horizontal element), a
first end (the left-hand end) attached to a first riser (the left-hand riser associated with stud 21) and a
second end (the right-hand end) which extends away from the first end. In our view, it would have
been obvious to one having ordinary skill in this art to substitute in Loggins for his handle 34a the handle
of Anderson in order to achieve Anderson's self-evident advantage of providing for a more secure grip.
It is also the appellant's contention that none of the references teaches a handle rising from an
outrigger at an "acute angle, as required by claim 28." However, Anderson in Fig. 3 clearly shows
risers extending at acute angles and Nichols shows that it is conventional in the art to provide a handle
on an outrigger. Accordingly, a combined consideration of Loggins, Nichols and Anderson would have
fairly suggested the subject matter defined by claim 28.
The appellant has not separately argued the patentability of claims 22 and 25 with any
reasonable degree of specificity. Accordingly, these claims fall with the claims from which they depend.
A reference may be said to teach away when a person of ordinary skill, upon
[examining] the reference, would be discouraged from following the path set out in the
reference, or would be led in a direction divergent from the path that was taken by the
applicant.
Accordingly, even if the appellant was correct in the assertion that the handle of Anderson was oriented
in a different direction from that claimed, this fact alone would fall far short of establishing that this
reference "teaches away" as the appellant contends.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007