Appeal No. 96-4137
Application 08/260,674
claim 19 is directed to a structure for tilting the seat and
the backrest. We agree with the examiner, that the tilting
feature is disclosed in Turner. (Figure 1; column 1, lines
57-67). As such, we will sustain this rejection as it relates
to claim 19.
Appellant argues, directing our attention to wing
section 78, that Turner does not disclose a lumbar support.
We do not find this argument persuasive because the examiner
is relying on central section 76 along with wing section 78
for teaching of lumbar support. We agree with the examiner
that central section 76 along with some portions of wing
section 78 provides support for the lumbar section of a person
seated in the chair disclosed.
Appellant also argues that there is no suggestion to
compare the wing section 78 with a cushion as disclosed in
Quinton. As stated above, in our view it is the central
section in addition to the wing section 78 which form the
lumbar support in Turner. In addition, as also stated above,
it is our view that there is clear suggestion in Quinton for
combining the chair disclosed in Turner with the lumbar
support disclosed in Quinton
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007