Appeal No. 2004-1315
Application No. 09/815,191
is a brake assembly consisting of a single irregular angled
shaped lever arm member 17-20 (shown in Figure 1). This aspect
of the teachings of Klubitschko relates to component b of
appellant’s claim 7, except for the claimed “pre-stressed
torsion spring member [190] located about one leg-section.” The
examiner relies upon Renaud-Goud for teaching a brake, for a
vehicle sliding on snow, comprising a binding assembly
consisting of several components which include a pre-stressed
torsion spring member 35, depicted in Figure 1 of Renaud-Goud.
The examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to
have modified the lever arm member (17-20 of Figure 1) of
Klubitschko to comprise a torsion spring, as shown in Renaud-
Goud, to provide elastic return to the operative braking
position, as taught by Renaud-Goud, in column 4, lines 24-26.
In summary, the examiner’s position is that it would have been
obvious to modify the lever arm member 17-20 of Klubitschko such
that it includes a torsion spring.
On pages 12-23 of the brief, appellant describes his
snowboard brake assembly, but, as pointed out by the examiner on
page 7 of the answer, the features that appellant describes are
not recited in the instant claims. For example, on page 12 of
the brief, appellant argues that the support member [140] is
non-moving, yet this aspect is not recited in claim 7. As
another example, on page 14 of the brief, appellant argues that
his invention has a single cylinder evenly shaped cavity on one
side. These aspects of appellant’s invention are not recited in
the claims (see claim 7, reproduced below, for emphasis):
7. A snowboard brake assembly [12] for a
snowboard system [10] comprising:
a. support member [140] consisting of a
predetermined height and geometric shape, having a
predetermined number of vertical centered apertures
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007