Appeal No. 98-0108 Page 9
Application No. 08/598,795
portion in Kazmerchek’s modified handle, 150 degrees which
is within appellant’s claimed range.
We cannot, however, sustain the § 103 rejection of
claims 5 though 8, 10 through 15, 19 and 20. The applied
references lack a teaching or suggestion of the generally
horizontally extending attachment sections as defined in
claims 5 though 8 and 11 through 15. The applied references
also lack a teaching or suggestion of the recitation that
the angle between the vertical plane and the plane
containing the central portion and the hand grip sections is
less than 35 degrees as defined in claims 8, 10, 13, 14, 19
and 20.
The examiner’s decision rejecting the appealed claims is
affirmed with respect to claims 1 through 4, 9 and 16
through 18, but is reversed with respect to claims 5 through
8, 10 through 15, 19 and 20. Since our reasons for
sustaining the rejection of claims 1 through 4, 9 and 16
through 18 differ from the examiner’s position, we herewith
designate our affirmance of the examiner’s decision
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007