Ex parte PIENAAR - Page 4

          Appeal No. 96-2302                                                          
          Application 08/260,058                                                      

                    We do not sustain the examiner's rejection of                     
          appellant's claim as being anticipated by the Preller patent.               
                    This panel of the board is in accord with appellant's             
          viewpoint that the "attachment means for securing" recitation of            
          claim 9 is a sixth paragraph (35 U.S.C.  112) means recitation             
          that must be construed to cover the corresponding structure                 
          described in the specification and equivalents thereof.  See                
          In re Donaldson, 16 F.3d 1189, 1195, 29 USPQ2d 1845, 1850 (Fed.             
          Cir. 1994).                                                                 
                    With the above in mind, we understand the afore-                  
          mentioned means plus function recitation to cover the described             
          (specification, pages 2 and 5) two attachment members 13.1 (one             
          shown in Figure 1), each with one or more brackets for securing a           
          (first) vehicle body thereto.  The attachment members secure the            
          first vehicle body to both the upper support member (12.4) and              
          the lower support member (12.3).                                            
                    A review of the Preller patent reveals to us that this            
          document fails to address two attachment members, each with one             
          or more brackets for securing a first vehicle thereto, the                  
          attachment members respectively securing the first vehicle body             


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007