Appeal No. 2001-0206
Application 08/959,964
particular subject matter permits. In this light, they do set
out and circumscribe the subject matter with a reasonable
degree of precision and particularity.
Therefore, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, rejection of claims 1 through 7, 10,
12, 18, 20, 22, 24, 25, 32 and 33.
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection based on Barker
Barker discloses a bicycle seat 9 comprising two support
portions 10 and 11 “shaped to conform generally to the human
anatomy in the buttock and upper leg region” (column 2, lines
35 through 37). A horizontal mounting member 15, which is
affixed to the bicycle via a frame 16 and a clamp 31, carries
the support
portions 10 and 11 at selected lateral positions with a
limited degree of free rotation (see Figure 3) that enables
unobstructed pedaling motion. As for the specific shape of
the support portions, Barker teaches that
[t]he surface configuration is of particular
importance to this invention in that the shape has
been derived so that the weight of the rider is
distributed uniformly over the entire surface of
support portions 10 and 11. This particular shape
eliminates any high pressure points which could
cause either long or short term rider discomfort.
Thus, the bicycle seat not only eliminates undue
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007