Appeal No. 2004-1779
Application No. 09/851,639
1. A holder comprising:
(a) a suction cup having a cup portion, a neck containing at
least one bore having a multi-sided cross section, and
(b) a split ring having two ends, said ends having a multi-
sided cross-section complementary to the bore, each end sized and
fitted within the at least one bore so that the split ring can be
rotated within the bore from a first position to a second
position such that in each position every side of the end of the
split ring is opposite a side of the at least one bore.
THE PRIOR ART
The references relied on by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness are:
Brown 4,506,408 Mar. 26, 1985
Adams (Adams ‘356) 5,078,356 Jan. 7, 1992
Rendall 5,323,996 Jun. 28, 1994
Adams (Adams ‘865)1 6,131,865 Oct. 17, 2000
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1 through 4, 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Rendall in view of Brown.
Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Rendall in view of Brown and Adams ‘865.
Claims 8 through 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Adams ‘356 in view of Brown.
1 The appellant does not dispute that the Adams ‘865 patent
is prior art with respect to the subject matter on appeal.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007