Appeal No. 2005-0934 Page 3
Application No. 10/414,060
Claim 1, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being
anticipated by Takamiya (JP 09156426 A). Takamiya teaches the use of an
umbrella during a departure through an open door of a car on a rainy day
comprising attaching a bottom end of a handle of the umbrella to a top edge of
the open door (as shown in Figure 1b) to provide standing room and allow the
user to have both hands available.
The appellant's arguments against the above-noted rejections are set forth in the
brief (filed August 23, 2004) and reply brief (filed December 20, 2004). The examiner's
response to those arguments is set forth in the answer (mailed December 3, 2004).
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art reference to Takamiya,1
and to the respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
The indefiniteness rejection
We will not sustain the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph.
1In determining the teachings of Takamiya, we will rely on the translation of
record provided by the USPTO.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007