Appeal No. 1999-0711 Page 9
Application No. 08/876,869
From our perspective, even accepting the examiner's position that it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the teachings of Horning to modify
Matsumoto by recessing the front loading portion of Matsumoto's truck body sufficiently to
accommodate the full width of the loading bin or bucket within the maximum width of the truck
body and providing the channels (81) with an arcuate upper dumping portion, Horning would
have taught one of ordinary skill in the art to provide on such an apparatus guide channels
having a substantially vertical section followed by a curved upper section leading to a short
horizontal section. Specifically, a skilled artisan would have appreciated from the teachings of
Horning that the need to provide inwardly and downwardly directed lower portions on the
guide channels to permit the bucket to be tucked under the truck body during highway travel is
obviated in an arrangement wherein the front loading section of the body is sufficiently recessed
relative to the rear section to accommodate the full width of the loading bucket. Therefore, we
conclude that the reference combination proposed by the examiner would not have suggested an
apparatus comprising both a charging hopper having an offset side recessed a sufficient amount
to accommodate the full width of the loading bucket within the maximum width of the truck
body and "an initially outward extending path" of the bucket including recesses having "lower
segments that are outwardly directed" as required by claim 48.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007