Appeal No. 2004-0729 Page 2
Application No. 09/957,202
The appellant's invention relates to a truck cover system. Further understanding
of the invention may be obtained from a reading of claim 1, which is reproduced, infra,
in the opinion section of this decision.
The examiner relied upon the following prior art references of record in rejecting
the appealed claims:
Lawson et al. (Lawson) 4,129,331 Dec. 12, 1978
Henning 6,338,521 Jan. 15, 2002
(filed Jun. 11, 1999)
The following rejection is before us for review.
Claims 1, 2, 9 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Lawson in view of Henning.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the answer
(Paper No. 12) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection and to
the brief and reply brief (Paper Nos. 11 and 13) for the appellant's arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
Claim 1, the sole independent claim before us for review, reads as follows:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007