Appeal No. 2004-0837
Application No. 09/778,481
appellants, however, do not argue that such belt is not well
known. In fact, the appellants concede at page 1 of the
specification that “rope and belt are considered synonymous” and
they typically include “a plurality of cords which may be
coated.” Thus, we determine that one of ordinary skill in the
art would have been led to employ the known coated belt recited
in claims 20, 21 and 22 or any other known belt in the elevator
system of the type suggested by Yamagami and/or Hirama, with a
reasonable expectation of successfully operating the elevator
system.
Thus, on this record, we concur with the examiner that the
evidence of obviousness, on balance, outweighs the evidence of
nonobviousness. Accordingly, we affirm the examiner’s decision
rejecting all of the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
15
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007