Appeal No. 1998-1537
Application No. 08/134,916
Appellants argue at page 23 of the brief that Tseng
discloses aluminum lugs, which are not hollow. However, while
Tseng's emphasis is on aluminum components, it discloses that
the same considerations are applicable to frames made of non-
metallic composite materials (col. 2, lines 52 to 55), and
that its method of joining components is suitable for use with
carbon fibers or fiber glass (col. 3, lines 44 to 47). We
consider that these disclosures of Tseng would have suggested
to one of ordinary skill making the tubes and lugs of a
bicycle frame of composite material. Also, considering lug 1 2
of Tseng, which is shown in Figs. 2 to 4 (col. 3, line 1), the
horizontal portion 12 is hollow, as shown in Fig. 4; likewise,
the vertical portion is hollow, as shown at its ends in Figs.
3-1 to 3-3. The fact that the end of portion 12 is closed, as
shown in Fig. 2, does not preclude it from being hollow,
"hollow" being a somewhat broad term meaning "having an empty
space or cavity within: not solid," such as a hollow tree or
2Although Tseng employs somewhat unconventional
terminology, calling element 1, for example, the "front bar,"
it is evident that elements 1, 4 and 6 constitute what
appellants designate as "lugs," comparable to appellants' lugs
31, 32 and 36, respectively.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007