Appeal No. 1997-3823
Application No. 08/320,782
that extends substantially the length of a front portion of
the lens holder so as to be able to receive therein the upper
edge of the frame of a pair of conventional glasses when the
nose piece (24) is removed.
We note the examiner’s position that Furness discloses
ski goggles in Figures 3-4 that include a frame for mounting a
display and a reflector. The examiner further notes that
conventional ski goggles can be used over a pair of
conventional glasses and therefor conventional goggles include
a longitudinally extending recess for receiving an upper edge
of the frame of conventional glasses frame. What the examiner
finds lacking in Furness is the teaching of using the
conventional goggles over a pair of glasses to thereby receive
the glasses in the recess. While the structure of the
“recess” is defined by the limitation of “for receiving an
upper edge of a frame of a pair of glasses,” claim 25 on
appeal does not require a frame of a pair of glasses: only a
recess for receiving the glasses is required. We understand
the recess in the goggles of Furness to be defined by the
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007