Appeal No. 99-0257 Page 3
Application No. 08/728,909
(3) Claim 5 on the basis of Estevez in view of Goeser, Altieri
and Kielinski.
The rejections are explained in the Examiner's Answer.
The arguments of the appellant in opposition to the
positions taken by the examiner are set forth in the Brief.
OPINION
In reaching our decision on the issues raised in this
appeal, we have carefully assessed the claims, the prior art
applied against the claims, and the respective views of the
examiner and the appellant as set forth in the Answer and the
Brief.
The appellant’s invention comprises a folding ramp having
at least first and second ramp members that are pivotally
attached together. The underside of each ramp is provided with
a plurality of longitudinally oriented support bars that add
strength and rigidity to the ramps, and which also provide
mounting points for a laterally oriented rod that pivotally
attaches the two ramps together. As established in claim 10,
the sole independent claim before us, the support bars attached
to the bottom surface of the second ramp extend along
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007