Appeal No. 2000-0212
Application 08/914,477
47). The vehicle is weighted eccentrically of its
longitudinal axis, so that when the motor is activated, it
will follow an “undefined and unpredictable” path (col. 3,
lines 41 to 43).
Oda discloses at col. 1, lines 12 to 18, that:
In the field of remotely controlled battery operated
wheel toys, it has been the practice to employ two small
motors, one connected to drive the front right wheel of
the wheel toy, and the other connected to drive the front
left wheel of the wheel toy, the speed of rotation of the
motors being controlled by a two channel transmitter, one
channel for each motor.
A toy automobile having such an arrangement is shown in Fig.
2, each front wheel 21, 29 being driven by a separate motor
41, 39 through reduction gearing 35, 37. The examiner takes
the position that (answer, page 4):
it would have been obvious to have provided [the Travers
toy car with] any well known self-propulsion drive for
toy cars, including the independent and remotely
controlled front drive motors of Oda’s figure 2. Such a
remotely controlled car would allow for more realistic
car motion requiring no physical user input/contact,
adding to the amusement for the child user.
We will first consider the rejection with regard to
independent claim 9.
Appellants first argue that “elimination of the rear
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007