Appeal No. 2006-0026
Application No. 10/012,518
THE PRIOR ART
The items relied on by the examiner to support the final
rejection are:
Bellamy et al. 4,613,251 Sep. 23, 1986
(Bellamy)
Schmidt et al. 6,413,003 Jul. 02, 2002
(Schmidt)
The admission on page 2 of the appellant’s specification
that
the state of the art utilizes the oblong opening of the
joint box, common in this type of construction where it
is projected to the body of the ball type pin, in such a
way that the narrowest side of the opening; namely, the
side that allows smaller angularity in the movement of
the ball type pin, becomes coincident with the pin to
restrict the movement of the ball type pin. This
arrangement prevents the bar from spinning around its
longitudinal axle [the admitted prior art].
THE REJECTION
Claims 1, 3 and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Bellamy in view of Schmidt and the admitted
prior art.
Attention is directed to the main and reply briefs (filed
October 27, 2003 and April 12, 2004) and the final rejection and
main and supplemental answers (mailed March 26, 2003, February 10,
2004, May 27, 2004 and July 25, 2004) for the respective positions
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007