Appeal No. 2001-2329 Page 7
Application No. 09/252,761
In our view, Brown only teaches that auxiliary hydraulic device control console 17 is
in one part (i.e., not a first part immovable relative to a frame and a second part immovable
relative to the frame and spaced from the first part with no console part in between) which
extends only through opening 38 in the floor portion 30. Thus, Brown does not teach that
auxiliary hydraulic device control console 17 extends through any other opening in the floor
portion 30 other than opening 38. Accordingly, it is our opinion that the marked up version
of Figure 2 of Brown attached to the answer is in error.3
Third, claims 1 to 3 and 5 to 11 include the limitation that the cab is adjacent the
vertical mast. However, none of the applied prior art discloses a cab adjacent a vertical
mast. In Wilderman (the only piece of prior art with a mast), the vertical mast 26 is not
4
adjacent the operator's cab 32 (see, for example Figure 1).
For the reasons set forth above, a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to
the claims under appeal has not been established by the examiner. Accordingly, the
3The cover plate 36 shown in Figure 2 of Brown that would be located behind the back of an
operator seated in seat 35 facing the steering control 16 could be an air vent for the engine rather than being
a part of a second console.
4In our view, the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification of the term
"adjacent" is "next to."
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007