Appeal No. 95-0575
Application No. 07/921,645
The examiner cites Bearson for its disclosure of an
adjustable basketball backboard support system wherein the weight
of the backboard is counterbalanced by a pair of adjustable
torsion springs, and Barisa for its disclosure of an adjustable
parallelogram support system for a viewing device wherein one of
the parallelogram links has an extension which mounts an
adjustably positioned weight to counterbalance the weight of the
viewing device. There is nothing in these disparate teachings
which would have suggested providing the adjustable basketball
backboard system shown in Exhibit A with a varying means of the
sort defined in claim 20.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 rejection of claim 20, or of claims 22 and 23 which depend
therefrom, as being unpatentable over Exhibit A in view of
Bearson and Barisa.
We shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections
of claim 13, which depends from claim 1, as being unpatentable
over Exhibit A in view of Nye, and as being unpatentable over
Exhibit A in view of Bearson and Barisa, and further in view of
Nye. Nye, Bearson and/or Barisa, applied by the examiner to meet
other features of the claimed invention, do not overcome the
above discussed deficiency in Exhibit A with respect to the
subject matter recited in parent claim 1.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007