Appeal No. 1999-1986
Application 08/677,776
patent, the declaration of Kevin S. Chinn dated June 5, 1997,1
and the respective viewpoints of appellants and the examiner.
As a consequence of our review, we make the determination
which follows.
We reverse the examiner’s rejection of appellants’
claims.
Initially, we note that appellants disclose
(specification, pages 5 and 6) a weight 16 (Fig. 6) that is
free to move in a cavity of a puck both parallel and
perpendicular to faces of the puck. The center of mass of
weight 16 may move such that the center of mass of the puck is
variable in three dimensions in the cavity. Appellants
additionally explain (specification, page 6) that
1In our evaluation of the patent relied upon, we have
considered all of the disclosure thereof for what it would
have fairly taught one of ordinary skill in the art. See In
re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA 1966).
Additionally, this panel of the board has taken into account
not only the specific teachings, but also the inferences which
one skilled in the art would reasonably have been expected to
draw from the disclosure. See In re Preda 401 F.2d 825, 826,
159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007