Appeal No. 2003-1653
Application No. 09/828,102
and said support arm from said support position to said
rest position, as the Examiner takes Official Notice it
was well known in the art of trailer hitches that when
a vehicle with an associated hitch backs toward a
trailer hitch, the driver often first attempts to “tap”
the trailer hitch (causing momentary contact and then
losing contact) in order to ensure alignment before
backing further to fully engage the hitch [final
rejection, pages 5 and 6].
As appears to be appreciated by the examiner, Schrum alone
offers no teaching or suggestion that the flat base plate 32,
release arm 24 and frame 48 are configured and arranged such that
the frame and trailer hitch lose contact with the base plate
prior to pivoting of the base plate and release arm from the
support position to the rest position. The examiner’s reliance
on the purported prior art practice of “tapping” to overcome this
deficiency is not well taken. In short, the examiner has not
cogently explained, and it is not apparent, how or why this
practice would have led the artisan to “modify” the Schrum system
such that the flat base plate 32, release arm 24 and frame 48
would be configured and arranged such that the frame and trailer
hitch lose contact with the base plate prior to pivoting of the
base plate and release arm from the support position to the rest
position.
As for independent claim 25, the examiner urges that,
contrary to the position taken by the appellant, Schrum’s
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007