Appeal No. 2006-0846
Application No. 10/068,695
Claim 9
The appellant argues that nothing in the references
suggests a relationship between the dimensions of the line guide
and the dimensions of the spool width as a means for controlling
backlash (brief, page 17). As explained above, the references
do not have to be combined for the purpose of solving the
problem addressed by the appellant. One of ordinary skill
in the art would have arrived at the appellant’s relative
dimensions of the line guide and spool through no more than
routine experimentation as discussed above regarding the
rejection of claim 6.
Accordingly, we are not convinced of reversible error in
the rejection of claim 9.
DECISION
The rejections of claims 1, 3, 4, 21 and 22 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Schumate, claims 5-7, 11-17, 23 and 24
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Shumate in view of Zwayer, and
claims 8-10, 18, 19, 25 and 26 over Shumate in view of
Shakespeare, are affirmed.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007