Appeal No. 2004-0136 Page 7
Application No. 09/761,340
We agree with the examiner that all three of the references disclose “forward
lean” systems, that is, systems in which the wearer’s leg is positioned by the boot to
lean forward, noting that such clearly is shown in Figures 1, 6 and 7 of Battistella, Figure
2 and 4 of Spademan, and Figures 1, 4, 6, 10A and 13 of Ottieri.
(1)
The first of the Section 102 rejections is that claims 57, 58, 60, 61, 65, 68, 69, 72,
97, 98 and 102 are anticipated by Battistella. Claim 57 recites, inter alia, medial and
lateral side cable members attached to the forward portion of the boot at only one
general position. We agree with the appellants that such an arrangement is not
disclosed or taught by Battistella. In the embodiments shown in Figures 1-5, 7, 8 and 9,
there appears to be a cord only on one side of the boot. In the embodiment of Figure 6,
there are cords on both sides of the boot, but they not attached to “the forward portion
of the boot,” nor are they attached at only one location. Battistella therefore does not
anticipate the subject matter of claim 57 or, it follows, of claims 58, 60 and 61, which
depend from claim 57. Independent claims 65 and 97 also contain these limitations,
and therefore this rejection of claims 65, 68, 69, 72, 97 and 98 also cannot be
sustained.
Claim 102 recites a boot comprising “cables from either side of the upper, rear
ankle portion attached to the lower front foot portion . . . for applying a forward-leaning
force to the boot upper ankle portion from only a single general position” (emphasis
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007