Appeal No. 2004-0184
Application No. 09/837,824
embraces any number of other regular (e.g., circular) and
irregular surfaces which are not elliptically extending. Under
these circumstances, the broad disclosure by Hand that surfaces
48 and 54 are convex is not sufficient to meet the limitation in
claim 1 calling for the faces to be “elliptically extending.”
Claim 1 also requires the body to have a “substantially
. . . elliptical” outer perimeter into which the upper and lower
elliptically extending faces converge. As clearly shown in
exemplary Figure 1, Hand’s disc assembly members, including the
one shown in Figure 5, have outer perimeters which are circular,
rather than substantially elliptical.
Hence, Hand does not disclose, expressly or under principles
of inherency, each and every element of the water skipping
article set forth in claim 1. Accordingly, we shall not sustain
the standing 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claim 1 as being
anticipated by Hand.
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejections of claims 2, 3 and 5
through 10
Claims 2, 3 and 5 through 8 depend from claim 1 and thus
include the parent claim’s limitations relating to the
elliptically extending faces and substantially elliptical outer
perimeter. Independent claims 9 and 10 contain similar
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007