Appeal No. 97-1143
Application 08/115,881
the combined teachings of Rice and Covert that we have noted
above would not be overcome.
Since all of the limitations of claim 1 would not have
been suggested by the applied prior art, we will not sustain
the rejection of independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
over Rice in view of Covert and Borgman.
Claims 2 and 4 through 6 are dependent on claim 1 and
contain all of the limitations of that claim. Accordingly,
the examiner’s rejection of claims 2 and 4 through 6 under 35
U.S.C.
§ 103 will not be sustained.
Rejection (2)
Claim 10 recites a ladder stand comprising, inter alia, a
base having front and rear ends, a plurality of stair treads
supported on and extending upward from the base, a first wheel
set mounted proximate the front of the base, and a retractable
second wheel set having a larger diameter than the first wheel
set and mounted approximately midway between the front and
rear of the base.
Berry teaches that carpeted areas present a problem for
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007