Appeal No. 2005-0496 Page 3
Application No. 10/032,633
which is directed to container holders for vehicles and, more particularly, to an armrest
or console assembly comprising such container holders. Simply stated, the examiner’s
position that Gignac’s armrest or console is a “juvenile seat” or “juvenile booster seat” is
unreasonable and untenable. A person of skill in the field of juvenile seats would
understand that a juvenile seat or booster seat is a seat specially adapted for children
who are too small and/or light to be protected by standard automotive seats and seat
belts and would not contemplate placing a child on an armrest or console of the type
disclosed by Gignac for such purpose. It thus follows that such a person would not
consider Gignac’s armrest or console assembly to be a “juvenile seat” or “juvenile
booster seat” as called for in appellant’s claims.
In light of the above, claims 1-17 are not anticipated by Gignac and the
anticipation rejection cannot be sustained. We thus find it unnecessary to consider the
appellant’s declaration under 37 CFR § 1.131 filed July 14, 2003.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007