Appeal No. 2000-1489 Page 10
Application No. 09/188,421
it would have been obvious to have selectively
removably mounted the upper deck and on the plate in
order to adjust the decks as taught by Best (42, 44,
etc.). That conventional retractable bolts be used as
claimed would have been the substitution of equivalent
securing means.
The appellant argues (brief, pp. 6-7) that even if the
teachings of Vartanian and Best are combined, there still
would not be provided a ramp which is removably mounted as
described in the claims. The appellant asserts that claims 2
to 4 and 6 to 8 are patentable since they recite retractable
bolts attached to the upper deck with the retractable bolts
being biased into operative engagement with the base plate so
that the upper deck is selectively removably secured to the
base plate. The appellant concludes that the above-noted
limitations are not made obvious by the Vartanian and Best
references. We agree for the reasons that follow.
While Best does teach and suggest the use of ramps that
can be mounted so that their height is adjustable and so that
they can be quickly and easily removed via the use of pins 44,
Best does not teach or suggest using biased retractable bolts
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007