Appeal No. 97-4211
Application 98/614,844
storage box and bed liner of Peters in the manner urged by the
examiner so as to arrive at the subject matter set forth in
appellants’ independent claim 1 on appeal. If anything, it
is our opinion that the collective teachings of Peters and
Brady as applied by the examiner would have been suggestive of
a storage receptacle essentially like that of Brady, wherein a
smaller/shorter storage receptacle would be mounted on rails
so as to be stowed at the forward end of the truck bed
immediately adjacent the cab of the truck as seen in Figures 1
through 3 of Brady. Thus, based on the foregoing, the
examiner's rejection of appellant’s claim 1, and claims 2 and
5 which depend therefrom, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on
Peters and Brady will not be sustained.
We have also reviewed the patent to MAN applied by the
examiner in the § 103 rejection of dependent claim 6.
However, we find nothing in this reference which would supply
that which we have noted above to be lacking in the basic
combination of Peters and Brady. Accordingly, the examiner's
rejection of claim 6 on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 103 will
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007