Appeal No. 1998-1924 Page 3
Application No. 08/642,907
The appellants’ invention relates to an in-line roller
skate frame. An understanding of the invention can be derived
from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which appears in the
appendix to the appellants’ brief.
The prior art
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Nielson 480,610 Aug. 9, 1892
Horton 1,822,657 Sep. 8, 1931
Gray 4,418,929 Dec. 6, 1983
Gierveld 5,046,746 Sep. 10, 1991
The rejections
Claims 1 through 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Gierveld in view of Gray.
Claims 5 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Gierveld as modified by Gray and
further in view of Nielson and Horton.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007