Appeal No. 2002-0251
Application No. 09/220,170
cubical one-piece structure having a forwardly opening hitch bar
receptacle (36) extending rearwardly from and entirely across a
front side thereof, said hitch bar receptacle terminating at a
downwardly facing seat (46) elevated above the remainder of said
receptacle and being shaped complementary to and receiving said
hitch bar.
According to the examiner (answer, page 4), Teich discloses
a supplementary weight or ballast attachment (24) meeting the
requirements of the ballast attachment set forth in appellants'
claim 7, except for the fact that the ballast attachment in Teich
is formed from three separate weights instead of as a one-piece
structure as required in claim 7 on appeal. Citing "Howard vs.
Detroit Stove Works" [sic, Howard vs. Detroit Stone Works, 150 US
164 (1893)] for the proposition that forming in one piece an
article, which has formerly been formed in two pieces (or three)
involves only routine skill in the art, the examiner concludes
that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art to make the ballast attachment of Teich as a one-piece block
as opposed to being made from three separate weights.
44
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007