Appeal No. 2000-0356 Page 5
Application No. 08/825,424
Karam II 5,408,372 Apr. 18,
1995
Frater et al. (“Frater”) 5,353,181 Oct.
4, 1994.
Claims 40-47 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
obvious over NHK in view of Karam II. Claims 48-55 stand
rejected under § 103(a) as obvious over NHK in view of Karam
II further in view of Frater.
OPINION
After considering the record, we are persuaded that the
examiner erred in rejecting claims 40-55. Accordingly, we
reverse.
Rather than reiterate the positions of the examiner or
appellant in toto, we address the main point of contention
therebetween. Admitting that “NHK does not show the first
rigid beam section having at least one stamped ridge extending
along an interior portion of its length from the first portion
through the second portion and terminating before reaching the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007