Ex Parte Chumley - Page 2




                    Appeal No. 2004-1938                                                                                                                                  
                    Application No. 09/887,741                                                                                                                            


                    the front end of the trailer moves the trailer relative to the                                                                                        
                    elongate towing member in a horizontal plane to an angular                                                                                            
                    position out of alignment with the towing vehicle thereby freeing                                                                                     
                    the front end of the trailer from obstruction by the elongate                                                                                         
                    towing member and the towing vehicle.  See, particularly, Figures                                                                                     
                    1-4 of the application.  Claims 1 and 5 are representative of the                                                                                     
                    subject matter on appeal and a copy of those claims can be found                                                                                      
                    in the Appendix to appellant's brief.                                                                                                                 


                    The sole prior art reference of record relied upon by the                                                                                             
                    examiner in rejecting the appealed claims is:                                                                                                         
                    Schurz                                           4,050,598                                         Sep. 27, 1977                                      
                                                                                                                                                                         
                    Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second                                                                                                 
                    paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point                                                                                      
                    out and distinctly claim the subject matter which appellant                                                                                           
                    regards as the invention.                                                                                                                             


                    Claims 1 through 4, 5, 6 and 9 stand rejected under                                                                                                   
                    35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Schurz.                                                                                                    




                                                                                    22                                                                                    





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007