Appeal No. 96-1337
Application 08/229,804
We reverse the examiner's rejection of appellants’ claims
under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
At the outset, we focus upon the content of independent
claim 1. The claimed tree stand platform is specified as
being “convertible”. As further set forth in the claim, the
rear portion of the main frame is disposed at an angle, with
respect to main frame sides defining a reference plane, so as
to extend in a plane different from the reference plane.
First and second members are “pivotally coupled” to the main
frame so as to be moved through the reference plane. A
flexible connector secured to the main frame and engaged with
the first and second members holds the platform to a tree.
The claimed “convertible” tree stand platform is constructed
and arranged to be mounted in (1) a “bow-hunting position"
wherein the rear end portion is disposed below the reference
plane and the first and second members are disposed above the
reference plane and in (2) "a rifle-hunting position" wherein
the rear end portion and first and second members are disposed
above the reference plane.
Turning now to the prior art applied by the examiner, we
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007