Appeal No. 2004-1493
Application No. 09/932,777
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Angel 2,018,591 Oct. 22, 1935
Bonavitacola 5,411,101 May 2, 1995
Rios et al. (Rios) 5,609,215 Mar. 11, 1997
Appellant's claimed invention is directed to a combination
groover tool and pivoting rake tool that is used to cultivate the
ground. The groover tool of the combination has a curved
sharpened lower edge.
Appealed claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Rios in view of Angel and Bonavitacola.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellant's arguments
for patentability. However, we are in complete agreement with
the examiner that the claimed subject matter would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of
§ 103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly, we will
sustain the examiner's rejection for essentially those reasons
expressed in the Answer, and we add the following primarily for
emphasis.
There is no dispute that Rios, like appellant, discloses a
combination groover tool and pivoting rake tool for cultivating a
ground area which comprises all the claimed features with the
exception of the groover tool not having a portion that has a
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007