Appeal No. 2003-0144 Page 7
Application No. 09/400,932
The speaking tube 1 is of flexible form in common use and has the usual mouth piece 2
and coupling 3 by which it is attached to the diaphragm of the machine not shown. A
first clamp 4 is secured around the tube 2 near the mouth piece 2 and a second clamp
16 is secured around the tube 2 near the coupling 3. The first clamp 4 is connected to
the second clamp 16 by means of adjustable arms 10 and 11.
Lastly, Henderson, teaches (page 3, line 123, to page 4, line 6) that:
It will be understood that the invention is not intended to be confined to
phonograph speaking tubes where it can be used with good results in other
forms of sound transmitters but it is as hereinbefore stated particularly well
adapted to phonograph and kindred machines.
It will also be apparent that the invention is capable of very wide
application, the forms illustrated in Figs. 4 to 8 admitting of the ball being turned
in the socket or the socket turned on the ball to carry an arm extending therefrom
to various angles of adjustment up or down or horizontally.
The same features of construction can be used in a support constituting a
telephone holder or an incandescent electric light support, as well as in other
kinds of supports.
In the rejection before us in this appeal (answer, pp. 3-4), the examiner
(1) ascertained1 that Metzger differs from the claimed subject matter in the linkage
being secured to the at least two collars; and (2) concluded that it would have been
1 After the scope and content of the prior art are determined, the differences between the prior art
and the claims at issue are to be ascertained. Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18, 148 USPQ
459, 467 (1966).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007