Appeal No. 2004-0050
Application No. 09/692,641
combination made by the inventor.); Uniroyal, Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corp., 837 F.2d
1044, 1044, 1051, 5 USPQ 1434, 1438 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
The Examiner rejected the claimed subject matter over the combination of
Koole and Burns. According to the Examiner, Koole discloses two uprights (net
standards) that comprise a lower post section and an upper post section. The
Examiner asserts that the upper post section comprises the net attachment means and
tensioning mechanism and is slidably connected to the lower post section for
telescoping movement. (Answer, p. 4). The Examiner acknowledges that Koole does
not disclose the specifics of the net. (Answer, p. 4). The Examiner cited the Burns
reference to establish that cables used to tension the net are conventional and used on
movable sleeves that can be raised and lowered. (Answer, p. 4). The Examiner
asserts that Koole as modified by the teachings of Burns meets the structural
limitations of the claimed invention. (Answer, p. 5). The Examiner further asserts the
claimed method steps would have been met by a user of the modified invention of
Koole which is inherently capable of height adjustment both before and after
tensioning of the net-supporting cable. (Answer, p. 5).
We cannot uphold the Examiner’s rejection. The method of appealed claims 1
and 10 requires tensioning the net-supporting cable to a net-supporting tension. The
net-supporting tension is described as a tension that is sufficiently great that the
- 6 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007