Appeal No. 95-2909
Application 08/048,270
The claims on appeal are directed to apparatus for
exercising the arms.
The references relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Hribar 4,146,222 Mar. 27, 1979
Gvoich et al. (Gvoich) 4,601,467 Jul. 22, 1986
Schaub et al. (Schaub) 4,848,739 Jul 18, 1989
The claims stand rejected as follows:2
(1) Claims 1 and 5 to 7, unpatentable over Hribar under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) or 103;
(2) Claim 5, unpatentable over Hribar in view of Gvoich, under
35 U.S.C. § 103;
(3) Claim 6, unpatentable over Hribar in view of Schaub, under
35 U.S.C. § 103;
(4) Claim 6, unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph.
Rejection (1)
Claims 1 and 7, the two independent claims on appeal,
recite, inter alia, “at least two relatively movable paddles”
(claim 1) or “a pair of relatively movable hollow paddles” (claim
2The claims were finally rejected as indicated in
rejection (1). Rejections (2), (3) and (4) are new grounds of
rejection, made in the Supplemental Examiner’s Answer (Paper No.
14).
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007