Appeal No. 95-2939
Application 08/050,690
underside of the channel because the legs themselves form the
channel. In view of the foregoing, we will not sustain the
rejection of claims 1, 2 and 6-9 based upon the Nelson patent.
In addition, we find no suggestion or teaching in Nelson for
a strap accepting channel. Therefore, we will not sustain the
examiner’s rejection of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In summary, the examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 2, 6 and 7
as anticipated by Osterland is sustained. The examiner’s
rejection of claims 1, 2 and 6-9 as anticipated by Nelson is
reversed. The examiner’s rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of
claim 10 as unpatentable over Nelson is not sustained.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007