Appeal No. 98-1044
Application 08/126,336
c) claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Schuman in view of Bifulco and Humphrey;
d) claims 3 through 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Ruden in view of Hoff, Silberman and Noble;
and
e) claims 12 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Ruden in view of Hoff and Silberman. 2
Reference is made to the appellants' main and reply
briefs (Paper Nos. 15 and 17) and to the examiner's main and
supplemental answers (Paper Nos. 16 and 19) for the respective
positions of the appellants and the examiner with regard to
the merits of these rejections.
Turning first to the standing 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
rejection of claim 11, Schuman pertains to "an aid for use in
golf putting and, in particular, to an aid for maintaining the
golfer's legs in a substantially fixed position to steady the
golfer's stance and reduce body sway" (column 1, lines 6
through 9). As described in more detail by Schuman,
2The examiner entered the above rejections of claims 3
through 5, 12 and 13 for the first time in the main answer
(Paper No. 16) to replace the rejections of these claims set
forth in the final rejection (Paper No. 13).
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007