Ex parte AKIBA et al. - Page 2

              Appeal No. 1998-2204                                                                                            
              Application No. 08/470,432                                                                                      

                      The appellants' invention relates to a fishing rod through which fishline is laid,                      
              comprising a tubular member or rod pipe and a guide means or member attached to the tubular                     
              member or rod pipe for introducing the fishline from outside the tubular member or rod pipe to                  
              a hollow inner core thereof.  The claims are particularly directed to the embodiment illustrated                
              in Figure 11.  An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary                     
              claims 16 and 26, which appear in the appendix to the appellants' brief.1                                       
                      The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed                
              claims are:                                                                                                     
              Viveiros                                     3,314,186                    Apr. 18, 1967                         
              Barnett                                      4,212,126                    Jul. 15, 1980                         
              Cranston                                     1,259,820                    Jan. 12, 1972                         
                      (British patent specification)                                                                          
              Saita et al. (Saita)                         1-178373                     Dec. 20, 19892                        
                      (Japanese unexamined utility model application)                                                         

                      The copy of claim 16 in the appendix to the appellants' brief is an inaccurate reproduction of the claim of1                                                                                                      
              record, in that, in line 9, "mortise" should be "slot" (see Paper No. 4, page 2).                               
                      Our understanding of this reference is derived from the complete copy of the application and translation2                                                                                                      
              thereof submitted by the appellants with the brief (Paper No. 15).  As indicated from the translation of the    
              abbreviated publication provided by the PTO (copy appended hereto), the date on which the Japanese application was
              laid open appears to be December 20, 1989, not 1878 as indicated on page 1 of the appellants' translation.      

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007