Appeal No. 2004-0157 Page 2
Application No. 09/706,771
BACKGROUND
The appellants’ invention relates to a suspension system for a steerable wheel.
An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1,
which appears in the appendix to the Brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Edahiro et al. (Edahiro) 5,009,449 Apr. 23, 1991
Ando 5,348,337 Sep. 20, 1994
Claims 1-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Ando in view of Edahiro.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the Answer
(Paper No. 15) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection, and to
the Brief (Paper No. 13) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 16) for the appellants’ arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007