Appeal No. 1999-0639 Page 3
Application No. 08/592,109
appellant and the examiner with regard to the merits of these
rejections.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellant's specification and
claims , to the applied Kiska patent, and to the respective2
positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we shall not sustain the examiner's
rejection for the reasons which follow.
Claims 1 through 9 recite a ladder system comprising,
inter alia, first and second rails having first and second
non-linear slots, respectively, in proximity to the bottom
thereof. Claim 10 recites a ladder rail comprising a web
portion and a flange portion extending from the web portion
and having a non-linear rail slot in the web portion through
which a bolt extends for attaching a ladder shoe to the web
2In reviewing claim 10, we note that the body of the claim, which
recites a bolt extending through the non-linear rail slot of the web portion
of the rail, does not appear to be commensurate in scope with the preamble of
the claim, which recites only a ladder rail and not a ladder rail in
combination with a bolt. Further, "its flange section" in claim 13, lines 2
and 3, lacks antecedent basis in the claim. We leave these issues to be
addressed in the event of any further prosecution before the examiner.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007