Appeal No. 2006-0846
Application No. 10/068,695
argued claim from which they depend. See 37 CFR
§ 41.37(c)(1)(vii)(2004).
Claim 1
Schumate discloses a fishing reel comprising a housing
body (42), a transversely orientated, revolvable cylindrical
spool (40) mounted to the housing body (figure 4), the spool
having a recessed channel for holding a length of coiled fishing
line (col. 2, lines 15-17; figure 3), and a crank (56).3
The appellant argues that Shumate’s spool does not rotate
during the casting and retrieval of a fishing lure (brief,
pages 9-10. Shumate discloses that “[e]ven though the reel is
not designed for use in casting, it can be used for short
distances” (col. 2, lines 28-29), which is all the appellant’s
claim 1 requires.
The appellant argues that Shumate’s spool has no recessed
channel (brief, page 9). A spool having a recessed channel is
shown in Shumate’s figures 2 to 4.
The appellant argues that Shumate does not disclose that
the spool configuration is beneficial for backlash control
(brief, page 9).4 The appellant’s claim 1 does not require that
3 The appellant’s means for controlling the rotation of the spool is a
conventional handle (specification, page 5, lines 10-11). Thus, the
appellant’s means for controlling the rotation of the spool reads on
Shumate’s crank, which is a conventional handle.
4 Backlash of the reel causes line tangling (specification, page 2, lines 18-
20).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007