Appeal No. 2000-0339 Page 3
Application No. 08/911,933
Claim 22, which is representative for present purposes,
follows:
22. A bowling scoring console comprising:
a free-standing housing defined by a base
member, a support structure extending vertically
upward from said base member, and a user-accessible
surface provided at an angle to said support
structure such that said user-accessible surface
faces slightly upward; and
an input system housed by said housing and
including input means for receiving user input data
related to the associated lane, said input means
being disposed on said user-accessible surface of
said housing to allow user access regardless of
whether the user is sitting or standing before the
scoring console.
(Appeal Br., App.)
The prior art applied by the examiner in rejecting the
claims follows:
Mowers et al. (“Mowers”) 5,255,185 Oct.
19, 1993
Petrich et al. (“Petrich”) 4,517,512 May 14,
1985.
Claims 1-5, 22, and 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as obvious over Mowers in view of Petrich.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007