Appeal No. 2004-1779
Application No. 09/851,639
Brown discloses “a structurally uncomplicated hinge
structure having variable position settings to allow the members
hinged together to be positioned at many different positions
relative to each other” (column 1, lines 9 through 12). The
reference describes the hinge structure as embodied in devices
such as article hangers, door hinges and gate hinges. The Figure
9 embodiment focused on by the examiner includes article fastener
plates 60 and 62, a male hinge component 72 on plate 60 and a
female hinge component 74 on plate 62. In Brown’s words, “the
male component 72 is hexagonal in cross section [and] [t]he
protruding points 76 of the hexagon [act] as ridges which align
with the grooves 78 of female component 74 to effect variable
positioning between plates 60 and 62” (column 4, lines 24 through
28]. Either or both of the ridges and grooves comprise a
resilient deformable material to allow ratchet-like rotation of
the male and female components between locked positional
settings.
In proposing to combine Rendall and Brown to reject claim 1,
the examiner concludes that it would have been obvious
to have modified the cross sections of the ends of the
split ring and the at least one bore of Rendall ‘996 to
be complementary hexagonal cross-sections as in Brown
‘408 (such that when the ring is rotated within the
bore from a first to a second position, inherently
every side of the end of the ring would be opposite a
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007