Appeal No. 96-4137
Application 08/260,674
connect or to join. Therefore, we will sustain this rejection
as it relates to claim 16.
We will sustain the rejection as it relates to claim
18 for the same reasons as given above for claim 10.
We now address the rejection of claim 1l under 35
U.S.C. § 103, as being unpatentable over Turner and Quinton,
as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of the French
Patent. The examiner cited the French Patent for showing
arcuate rungs 40 with a lower arcuate surface and means 41
provided on the upper surface for attaching each respective
rung to a front chair leg 7 and a rear chair leg 3 (Examiner’s
Answer at pages 10-11). It is the examiner’s opinion, and we
agree, that it would have been obvious to provide the child’s
seat disclosed by Turner with the rungs taught by French
Patent to provide a rocking chair means which is easy to
connect and disconnect. In view of the foregoing, we will
sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Turner and Quinton and further
in view of the French patent.
The appellant has not argued the propriety of this
rejection as it related to the French Patent but rather
18
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007