Appeal No. 2000-1614
Application No. 08/944,371
constant diameter, or free from joints. Therefore, elements
1, 3, and 5 of Cover may together be considered a "base rod,"
as that expression is broadly recited in claim 2, and Convey’s
belt (strap) 2 does extend through the first end of the base
rod, as claimed, since it extends through element 1.
As for appellant’s second argument, belt (strap) 2 of
Cover "may be the ordinary cartridge-belt generally employed"
(page 1, lines 61 and 62), and would be made of a flexible
material, such as leather. Where the belt passes through loop
1 the base rod would inevitably be pivotable relative to the
belt, for even if the belt were a snug fit in the loop, the
rod would be pivotable, at least to a slight extent, due to
the flexibility and compressibility of the belt material. In
this regard we note that claim 2 does not recite any
particular degree of pivoting, so that even though Cover’s
elements 1, 3, 5 might only be pivotable on belt 2 to a very
slight extent, that still would inherently meet the recitation
in claim 2 of "pivotably supporting said base rod relative to
the user at a position where said strap extends through said
base rod."
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007