Appeal No. 2006-0846
Application No. 10/068,695
the spool configuration is capable of being beneficial for
backlash control.
For the above reasons we find that claim 1 is anticipated
by Schumate.
Claim 21
The appellant argues that Shumate does not disclose “the
orientation of the channel with respect to the spool” (brief,
page 10). Claim 21 requires that the spool has a line-holding
channel having a cross-section that is substantially rectangular
and narrower than its depth. A spool having such a channel is
shown in Shumate’s figures 2 to 4.
Claim 22
The appellant argues that it is merely coincidental that
the vertical mid-point of Shumate’s ring-shaped line guide (22)
is no lower than approximately the vertical mid-point of the
line-holding channel and no higher than approximately the top
rim of the line holding channel (figure 2) (brief, pages 10-11).
Shumate’s disclosure of that positioning anticipates the
appellant’s claim 22 regardless of whether it is coincidental.
Claim 13
Zwayer discloses a fishing reel having a circular line
opening (126) that is smooth and protects the fishing line from
abrasion (col. 6, line 66 – col. 7, line 2).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007