Appeal No. 1999-2278 Page 4
Application No. 08/641,442
wherein when the thumb is positioned so that the handle
is between the first extension and the second extension, the
thumb is moved in a first direction causing the first
extension to contact the handle and to move the handle from an
unlatched position to a latched position or the thumb is moved
in a second direction causing the second extension to contact
the handle and to move the handle from the latched position to
the unlatched position.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims is:
Wanger et al. (Wanger) 5,014,255 May 7, 1991
Claims 1, 2, and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as being anticipated by Wanger.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and appellants regarding the above-noted
rejection, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper
No. 17, mailed November 24, 1998) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejection, and to appellants'
brief (Paper No. 16, filed August 19, 1998) and reply brief
(Paper No. 18, filed February 1, 1999) for appellants'
arguments thereagainst. Only those arguments actually made by
appellants have been considered in this decision. Arguments
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007