Appeal No. 97-4211
Application 98/614,844
manufacture. Brady teaches a cover hinged to the
receptacle at a rear wall thereof that closes onto
locking means as seen in the hasp in figure 4. The
means for removably mounting of Peters et al. are a
substantial equivalent to that disclosed by
applicant and the receptacle locking means of Brady,
while not equivalent, are simpler and hence less
costly than that disclosed by applicant. It would
have been obvious to provide in Peters et al. an
enclosed covered and lockable receptacle of small
dimensions as taught by Brady in order to carry
smaller items and for the ease of manual movement of
same.
Contrary to the examiner’s position, we do not believe
that the collective teachings of the applied references to
Peters and Brady would have in any way been suggestive of a
storage recep-tacle of the type set forth in appellant’s claim
1 on appeal mounted to the bed of a covered pick-up truck in a
rear portion thereof immediately adjacent the tailgate of the
truck and so that the receptacle occupies only said rear
portion of the truck bed at the rear thereof when in its
retracted (stowed) position.
Given the clear disclosure in Brady of the disadvantages of
having a storage receptacle mounted immediately adjacent the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007