Appeal No. 96-0922
Application 08/251,306
disclosed and is claiming but only that the claims on appeal
"read on" something disclosed in the reference, i.e., all
limitations of the claim are found in the reference. See
Kalman v. Kimberly Clark Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ
781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983); cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984).
A consideration of the subject matter of claim 17
relative to the Hegg patent reveals to us that the claimed
small watercraft reads on, and is therefore anticipated by,
the reference document.
Contrary to the attorney's argument on page 4 of the
brief (Paper No. 16) that a rider’s hand could not “easily be
accommodated” by the seat back of Hegg, we are in accord with
the view of the examiner (answer, pages 3 and 4) that the back
rest
(seat back) disclosed by Hegg is clearly capable of being
grasped (acting as a handle), easily or otherwise. No evi-
dence is before us to the effect that the back rest (seat
back) of Hegg (Figures 2 and 3) is incapable of being grasped
(acting as a handle) by a swimmer (rider) entering the swim
platform 18 from the rear of the boat 10.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007