Appeal No. 1999-2781
Application No. 08/656,299
observe that the examiner has not once during the entire
prosecution of this application indicated exactly how the
enumerated claims are considered to be readable on the three
different references applied. Our only insight into the
position of the examiner is found on page 5 of the answer
where the examiner has 1) indicated that the three applied
references "all show pawls arranged as a mechanical toggle
switch in that their pawls comprises [sic] an elbow like joint
consisting of two arms," and 2) also put forth an
interpretation of the language found in independent claim 1
that "[t]he phrase 'either', as set forth in claim 1, may be
interpreted as the pawl being biased to remain in one of a
selected 'free' and 'lock' condition but not necessarily both
conditions." In addition, the examiner has for the first time
in the answer (page 5) pointed to Figure 3 of Fertier, urging
that this figure shows "a pawl (39) which is biased by spring
(41) to remain in a free condition, and a spring, connected
(42), which biases the pawl to remain in a locked condition."
Appellant's response to the examiner's position (brief,
pages 9-10) is that the examiner has adopted a position that
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007