Appeal 2006-2888
Application 10/318,425
1 Lucht US 6,139,249 Oct. 31, 2000
2
3
4 Appellant contends that Tolman does not disclose a ramp and that the
5 rungs are not received with the slots of the side rails with a connecting
6 member securing the side rails together with the rungs captured
7 therebetween such that the rung is not otherwise secured to the side rail.
8 Appellant also contends that Lucht does not disclose a connecting
9 member securing the side rails together with the rungs captured
10 therebetween such that the rung is not otherwise secured to the side rail.
11 Appellant further contends that Tolman is not analogous art.
12
13 ISSUES
14 The first issue is an issue of claim construction, namely what is meant
15 by the language in independent claims 1, 11, and 16: “said rung captured
16 therebetween.”
17 The second issue is whether the Appellant has shown that the
18 Examiner erred in finding that Tolman is analogous art and that Tolman
19 discloses a ramp having rungs received in slots of the side rails with a
20 connecting member securing the side rails together with the rungs captured
21 therebetween such that the rung is not otherwise secured to the side rail.
22 The third issue is whether the Appellant has shown that the Examiner
23 erred in finding that Lucht discloses a connecting member securing the side
24 rails together with the rungs captured therebetween such that the rung is not
25 otherwise secured to the side rail.
26
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013