Appeal No. 95-0575
Application No. 07/921,645
claimed invention, do not overcome the foregoing deficiency in
Exhibit A with respect to the subject matter recited in claim 1.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103 of
claims 3 and 4, which depend from claim 1, as being unpatentable
over Exhibit A in view of Bearson and Barisa, or the standing
35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 1, and of claims 2, 3 and 6
through 10 which depend therefrom, as being unpatentable over
Exhibit A in view of Bottorff, Haston, Wilson, Sinner and Grable.
Independent claim 20 recites an adjustable basketball
backboard support system comprising, inter alia, a parallelogram
linkage system for interconnecting a backboard and a support
member, adjustment means for adjustably connecting one of the
links of the parallelogram linkage system to the support member,
and a counter-weight means including a mass on the adjustment
means. The examiner concedes that the adjustable basketball
backboard system shown in Exhibit A does not meet the limitation
in claim 20 requiring “varying means for adjusting the connection
of said adjustment means to said one link to vary said forces
applied by said mass” (see page 3 in the final rejection).
According to the examiner, it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to provide the system shown in Exhibit
A with such a varying means in view of Bearson and Barisa (see
page 3 in the final rejection).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007