Appeal No. 2004-2335 Page 11
Application No. 09/867,495
in the form of a clasp or clip (90, 92) may be secured to a second end of the elastic cord
(30).
Thus, looking to Figure 2 of the Vasilopoulos patent, I agree with the examiner that
this patent discloses a bungee cord tie down structure which has different types of
securing devices on opposite ends of the tie down and, more specifically, a tie down
which has a bungee cord (30) that has a hook (50) at one end for securing the bungee
cord to a first object and an opposite end having a clasp or clip, wherein the clasp/clip
(92) includes a pair of pivoted jaws (97, 98) with teeth on at least one of the jaws for
securing that end of the bungee cord to an object or support. I further agree with the
examiner that the bungee cord tie down of Vasilopoulos differs from that defined in
claim 5 on appeal only in the details of the form of clasp/clip associated therewith and
that the patent to Thurston discloses a clasp/clip like that broadly recited in appellant's
claim 5. Moreover, I concur in the examiner's assessment that it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of appellant's invention to have
utilized a known alternative form of clasp/clip like that in Thurston in place of the
alligator clip (92) of Vasilopoulos, thereby rendering the subject matter of claim 5 on
appeal obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007