Appeal No. 1997-3823
Application No. 08/320,782
mirror being removable. After careful consideration of
Furness, we agree with appellants that Furness does not teach
removably mounting the mirror (120) to the frame. Furness
only discloses that the mirror (120) is mounted on a shaft for
pivotal movement and that the mirror can be secured in an
adjustable position. There is nothing in Furness that would
teach or suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art that the
mirror (120) is, or can be, removably mounted on the frame.
In light of the foregoing, we will not sustain the
standing 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 29 and 33, and
claims 30-32, 34, and 37-38 which depend therefrom.
In reviewing claims 46-51 on appeal, we consider that the
claims as drafted are inaccurate and indefinite in that we
have no clear direction from appellants as to exactly what
structure is being claimed in independent claim 46 on appeal
by the phrase “said earphone coupled to said frame through a
wire.” Note, the disclosed earphones (38, 39) seen in
appellants’ Figure 1 are mounted on the right and left temples
(20, 21) and that the wire (41) appears to merely electrically
16
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007