Appeal No. 1997-1812
Application 08/055,382
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Coffey in view of Funke.
However, it appears that this rejection is maintained by the
examiner in this appeal based on the mistaken belief that
claim 36 depends from 25, as it did at the time of the final
rejection, rather than claim 35, as it does now. Because 8
claim 36 now depends for claim 35, it requires, inter alia,
interconnecting means for each adjacent pair of panel units
permitting flex movement thereof along the radial lines of
separation therebetween, and wheel units connected to each
adjacent pairs of panel units along the radial lines of
separation. The examiner has not explained how the combined
teachings of Coffey and Funke render obvious this subject
matter; nor is it apparent to us how this subject matter would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in light
of the teachings of the applied references. Accordingly, we
cannot sustain the examiner’s § 103 rejection of claim 36
based on Coffey in view of Funke.
Claims 15 and 31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
8 The dependency of claim 36 was changed from claim 25 to
claim 35 in the amendment filed subsequent to the final
rejection.
18
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007