Appeal No. 97-0032
Application No. 08/095,295
modifications would not have been the container defined in
appellants' claim 33. While I agree with my colleagues that the
snap fastener members (32, 33) seen in Warren may broadly be
considered to be a "pivot means," such pivot means in the context
of the Warren patent does not, and can not, perform the function
specified in appellants' claim 33.
As is made clear in Warren (page 1, lines 97-108) the purse
(30) includes loops (31), affixed to the back of the purse,
through which the leg band (10) passes to support the purse on
the leg band. The fastener members (32, 33) in Warren are
provided merely to hold the purse against sidewise movement on
the leg band. Thus, while the snap fastener members (32, 33) may
allow some minor degree of pivotal movement of the purse relative
to the leg band (10), and therefore may be broadly considered to
be a "pivot means," these fastener members are constrained by the
loops (31) from enabling the purse (30) of Warren "to be pivoted
to a horizontal position independent of any orientation of said
strap on said torso of said person" as specifically required in
appellants' claim 33 on appeal. For this reason, I would reverse
the examiner's rejection of claim 33 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
2828
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007