Appeal No. 98-1028
Application 08/378,809
(Paper No. 11, mailed December 12, 1996), and the supplemental
examiner’s answer (Paper No. 13, mailed April 24, 1997).
The opposing viewpoints of appellants are set forth in
the brief (Paper No. 10, filed October 23, 1996), the reply
brief (Paper No. 12, filed February 10, 1997), and the
supplemental reply brief (Paper No. 14, filed June 6, 1997).
Independent claim 2 calls for a tie comprising an
elongated tongue having a first set of ratchet teeth on one
broad side of the tongue and a second set of ratchet teeth on
an opposite broad side of the tongue. The tie is further
described as including a locking head at one end of the tongue
having an opening for receiving the tongue. Claim 2 sets
forth that one side of the locking head opening has a movable
pawl including at least one pawl tooth for engaging the first
set of ratchet teeth and that an opposing side of the locking
head opening has an abutment surface including at least one
tooth for engaging the second set of ratchet teeth when the
tongue is inserted into the opening. Independent claims 5-7
contain similar limitations.
In rejecting the appealed claims as being unpatentable
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007