Appeal No. 97-0331
Application 08/359,562
paddle bears against the forearm of the user near the elbow
provides (1) support for the wrist of the user and (2) leverage
between the elbow and hand. Consistent with the appellant’s
specification, we do not believe that the artisan would consider
the end of the paddle, in the arrangement depicted by Malm in
Fig. 1 (wherein the end of the paddle would bear against the
forearm of a user only a very short distance above the wrist when
the wrist is flexed in the manner described by the examiner), to
bear against the forearm “near” the elbow as claimed. This being
the case, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 1, 2, 8 and
9 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) based on the reference to Malm for the
reasons stated by the examiner.
As to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of (1) claims 3
and 10 based on the combined teachings of Malm and Whipple and
(2) claims 4-7 and 11-14 based on the combined teachings of Malm
and Girden, we have carefully reviewed the references to Whipple
and Girden but find nothing therein which would overcome the
deficiencies that we have noted above with respect to Malm.
Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejections of claims 3-7 and
10-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Under the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b) we make the
following new rejection.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007