Appeal No. 2000-0511
Application No. 08/758,343
given its broadest reasonable interpretation. The split ring 4 is a solid oblong piece and thus
resembles a "bar" as broadly claimed.3
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Polotti in view of
Bramming.
Polotti discloses projecting teeth and a dog for engagement therewith, rather than a
screw adjustment as claimed, for tightening the band element 20. However, as evidenced by
Bramming (column 2, lines 37-53), screw adjustment arrangements for tensioning clamping
bands of the type taught by Polotti were also well known in the art at the time of the appellant's
invention. Merely to replace the teeth and dog arrangement of Polotti with another well known
clamping band tensioning means, such as a screw adjustment, to obtain the self-evident
advantages thereof (i.e., more precise control over the degree of tension applied) would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Polotti
in view of McLeod.
Polotti does not disclose an opening through the handle for attaching the handle to an
object as required by claims 6 and 7. It was well known in the art at the time of the appellant's
invention to provide devices such as household implements and utensils with an opening or hole
therethrough to facilitate hanging of the device on a nail or the like when not in use, as
3An oblong piece or mass of something solid (Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition
(Simon & Schuster, Inc. 1988)).
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007