Appeal No. 1999-1986
Application 08/677,776
As acknowledged by the examiner (answer, page 2),
appellants have indicated that claims 21 through 27 and 29
through 37 stand or fall together. Accordingly, we select
independent claim 21 for review on appeal, with the remaining
claims standing or falling therewith. We do note, however,
that the other independent claims 29 and 37, akin to claim 21,
include limitations pertaining to the weight being
substantially movable in three dimensions both parallel and
perpendicular to faces of the puck, with sufficient freedom of
movement to permit the weight to permit the central axis of
the weight to become angularly offset from normal to the faces
and to permit the weight to simultaneously contact both of the
faces so that the puck will more readily topple when rolling
on it side.
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the obviousness issue
raised in this appeal, this panel of the board has carefully
considered appellants’ specification and claim 21, the applied
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007