Appeal No. 2005-0028
Application No. 09/489,602
Claims 1, 4 through 18, 21 and 22 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Schmidt in view of
Bezin. This rejection is collectively set forth on pages 2-7 of
the final rejection (Paper No. 14, mailed August 13, 2002).
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
appellant and the examiner regarding the above-noted rejection,
we refer to the final rejection, the examiner's answer (Paper No.
21, mailed May 20, 2003) and appellant’s brief (Paper No. 20,
filed April 10, 2003) for a full exposition thereof.
0PINION
Having carefully reviewed the obviousness issues raised in
this appeal in light of the record before us, we have made the
determinations which follow.
Like the examiner, we find that Schmidt discloses a bicycle
crank arm structure (1) projecting from a spindle shaft end and
comprising a first arm (2) having a first crank end connected
with respect to the spindle shaft end and a first distal end
terminating at a pedal attachment area (4); and a second arm (3)
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007