Appeal No. 2003-1363
Application No. 09/608,985
as to whether the bowed downwardly body 13 of the spring arm 12
of Miller would be capable of mating with an interstice 2 to
prevent movement of the open yoke frame (loop) relative to the
bracelet (strap). Conjecture and speculation is not a sound
basis for any conclusion of anticipation under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b). As explicitly stated by the patentee (page 2, lines 78
through 110), the spring arm 12 bears upon the body portion 1 of
the bracelet to force it into frictional engagement with the
bottom bar 6 of the yoke frame, while end portion 5 of the
bracelet is held in frictional engagement with the top-bar 7 of
the yoke frame under the spring tension of gripping-device 15.
It is clear to this panel of the Board that Miller fails to teach
first and complementary components of a mating structure for
preventing a loop from sliding freely along a strap. For the
above reasons, the anticipation rejection based upon the Miller
patent cannot be sustained.
Obviousness
We cannot sustain the rejection of claims 14, 16, and 17
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Miller, nor
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007