Appeal No. 1997-0262
Application 08/286,795
tether strap (16) is a sewn connection at the middle part of
the strap (see Hirabayashi, col. 3, lines 5-8). Since we
agree with appellants that the collective teachings of
Hirabayashi and Sakakida as applied by the examiner, or
otherwise, would not render obvious the subject matter of
claims 1, 3, 5, 8, 10 and 12 on appeal, it follows that we
will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of those claims
under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
We have additionally reviewed the teachings of
Seizert and MacFadden relied upon by the examiner in the
rejection of dependent claims 4, 11, 15 and 16 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103, however, we find nothing in these added references
which provides for that which we have found above to be
lacking in Sakakida or in Hirabayashi and Sakakida considered
together. In addition, we agree with appellants (brief, pages
12-13) that the mounting bracket used in MacFadden for
mounting parts, such as electrical units of a radio set, to an
underlying support (2), is non-analogous art with regard to
the tether/strap connections of the airbag systems of
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007