Appeal No. 2004-0415
Application No. 09/764,743
Therefore, for purposes of this appeal, we select claims 1 and
3 and determine the propriety of the examiner’s rejections based
on these claims alone consistent with 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(2002).
Claims 1 and 3, which are representative of the subject matter on
appeal, are reproduced below:
1. In a shopping cart having a basket having a front
opposite a rear and forming an upper opening circumscribed
by an upper peripheral rim, a handle supported at the rear,
and said cart rolled and supported on a pair of laterally
rotatable, front castor wheels opposite a pair of non-
pivoting rear wheels, wherein the improvement comprises:
a spring urged brake mechanism capable of selectively
impinging against said rear wheels in order to provide a
breaking force; and
means for releasing said impinging when two respective
shopping carts are nested together.
3. The improvement of Claim 2, wherein said spring urged
brake mechanism comprises:
an actuation lever mounted in an articulated manner
near or to the handle and in mechanical communication with
the spring urged brake mechanism by an actuation cable; and
actuation guide means for allowing the mechanical
communication of a brake release force from a location
remove from the spring urged brake mechanism in a manner
that avoids obstruction of or access to the nesting access
area.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:
Trimble et al. (Trimble) 5,499,697 Mar. 19, 1996
Nolting, Jr. et al. (Nolting) 6,123,343 Sep. 26, 2000
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007