Appeal No. 2003-1649 Page 4
Application No. 09/523,469
established by presenting evidence that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to
combine the relevant teachings of the references to arrive at the claimed invention.
See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988) and In re
Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013, 1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972).
Rejection based on Happ alone
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 1 to 3, 8 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Happ.
Claims 1 and 21, the only independent claims subject to this ground of rejection,
read as follows:
1. A creeper comprising opposed side rails; a pad supported between said
side rails; and a plurality of caster assemblies supporting said side rails; said
side rails having planar top and bottom surfaces, said top surface tapering
toward said bottom surface to define a decreased cross section of said side rails,
the decreased cross section of said side rails being positioned, adjacent said
pad; said caster assemblies being positioned wholly under and attached solely to
said bottom surface of said side rails.
21. A creeper comprising opposed hollow side rails, each having a top
surface spaced from a generally horizontal bottom surface by opposed arcuate
surfaces to define a cavity therebetween; a pad supported between said side
rails; and a plurality of caster assemblies supporting said side rails and attached
thereto with a fastener extending through said bottom surface into said cavity
without creating a protrusion on said top surface of said side rails.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007