Appeal No. 2000-0913
Application No. 09/067,123
restraining position thereof, and because appellants’ claims
are cast in open “comprising” format that does not limit the
claimed subject matter to a restraint device having one and
only one restraint bar.
Rejection (b)
At the outset, we note that the rejection of claim 4,
which depends from claim 3, has not been argued with any
reasonable degree of specificity apart from the claims from
which it depends. Therefore, the rejection of claim 4 as
being unpatentable over Niebuhr in view of Busch will be
sustained. See Nielson, 816 F.2d at 1572, 2 USPQ2d at 1528.
The Busch reference additionally cited by the examiner
against claims 2, 4, 6 and 10-12 is directed to a passive seat
belt system comprising an arm assembly that moves between a
Figure 1 position for allowing an occupant to be seated and a
Figure 2 position across an occupant’s lap for holding the
occupant in the seat. In addition, a shoulder belt (not
numbered) is connected at one end to the latch assembly 20 of
the arm assembly and at another end to the seat back.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007