Appeal No. 2001-1181
Serial No. 09/131,156
that disclosed by appellant, which has upper and lower
sections 3, 1 releasably
secured together, and a door 4 at the front. The examiner
asserts that Leader discloses that the frame members of the
stroller are pivotally connected together, and that it would
have been obvious to have modified the stroller and pet kennel
of Leader by employing the pet kennel of Ho (answer, pages 2
and 3)2
We agree with the examiner that it would have been
obvious to use the kennel disclosed by Ho in place of the cage
enclosure 15 of Leader. Use of the Ho kennel (which appellant
states at page 5 of the brief is the type of kennel
acknowledged in the application as prior art) would have the
obvious advantage of allowing the use of a conventional pet
carrier in the Leader stroller 20 instead of the specialized
cage enclosure 15 disclosed by Leader. Moreover, the kennel
10).
The examiner further states that Ho discloses quick release connection2
means; appellant does not disagree.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007