Appeal No. 98-1049
Application 08/493,463
Karoff teaches a serving table/caddy
(Fig. 1) comprising: first and second
upright support pillars (14), a first tray
(23) extending laterally away on one side
from the support pillars, and a second tray
(21) extending laterally away from another
side of the support pillars. For claims 18
and 19, Karoff fails to teach a means for
mounting the pillars in a vertical rela-
tionship/clamp. Steely teaches a
serving table/caddy (Fig. 1) having a means
for mounting the pillars in a vertical
relationship/clamp (22) arranged at one end
of the table. It would have been obvious
to modify the serving table/caddy of Karoff
by adding a mounting means/clamp thereon
(such as the one taught by Steely), to
provide a means on the table/caddy which
would securely hold it in one position"
(final rejection, page 2).
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints
advanced by the examiner and appellant regarding the above-
noted rejection, we make reference to the final rejection
(Paper No. 8, mailed November 20, 1996) and the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 14, mailed October 28, 1997) for the exam-
iner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection, and to
appellant’s brief (Paper No. 13, filed September 29, 1997) for
appellant’s arguments thereagainst.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007