Appeal No. 97-1025
Application No. 08/183,571
Based on our analysis and review of Ahrens and claim 4, it
is our determination that the only difference is the limitation
that the gripping member is of a circular shape. It is our view
that the switch elements of Ahrens are (1) readable on the term
"control pads" as used in claim 4, and (2) equivalent to the
structure recited in the appellant's specification which
corresponds to the "control means" recited in claim 4.
With regard to this difference, it is our opinion that it
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at
the time of the appellant's invention to modify the shape of
Ahrens' rim to be circular in view of the art recognized
alternative circular shape as suggested and taught by Niemeyer's
circular rim since the shape of the rim is an obvious matter of
designer's choice.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
22 and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph is affirmed; the
decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 to 8, 10 to 15, 20,
21, 23, 25 to 33, 35, 37, 38 and 40 to 44 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
24
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007