Appeal No. 2004-1098
Application No. 09/658,278
so that the standards can be arranged immediately adjacent the
sides of a bass or viol for securing it to the cart. To deal
with Marcus’ failure to meet these limitations, the examiner
offers the following analysis:
It is old and well known in the art to make
instrument stands and carts adjustable so that they can
accommodate various sizes and shapes of instrument.
Making a known product adjustable is not a patentable
improvement. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (1954). The
most straight forward manner to make the Bass Viol
stand of [Marcus] adjustable would be to provide slots
that allow the standard members (29) to be moved
longitudinally of the cart and tightened in the desired
position. Such a structure is taught by [Marcus] in
regard to the adjustable bails 24 and 30. The bails
are provided with longitudinal channels dimensioned to
receive a screw for adjustably mounting the bails.
Also a total of four channels are provided, each at the
extremities of the bails.
From this channel teaching provided by [Marcus],
providing channels as defined by [claim 16] in the base
plate for adjustably mounting the standards would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the
time the invention was made. This modification would
provide an effective structure for making the known
arrangement of the standards adjustable and would allow
the cart to be adjusted to accommodate a variety of
sized instruments [answer, pages 3 and 4].
The finding by the examiner that the Marcus hand cart
responds to all of the limitations in claim 16 except for those
relating to the adjustable mounting of the standards is well
taken. The manner in which the examiner deals with this
deficiency, however, is unsound.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007