Appeal No. 96-2712
Application 08/313,548
modify Jory in the manner posited by the examiner in the rejection
under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Instead, appellants have merely made broad
assertions that the form of Jory as modified "would not be operable
in the insertion apparatus of Jory" (brief, page 20) and that the
card "could pivot on the intermediate slit 22 and become disengaged
with opposing slits 20" (brief, page 21). We find these assertions
to be based on pure speculation or mere attorney argument without
any evidence in this record to support such assertions.
As for the examiner's position that it would have been obvious
to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the slits (20) of Jory
in the form of L-shaped slits as in Coit, we are in agreement with
the examiner. From our perspective, the clear teaching of Coit, at
page 2, lines 61-72, is that the shape of the slits in such a
mailing folder is generally somewhat optional, as long as they
perform their intended function. Appellants' argument that Jory
fails to disclose a flap which resiliently flexes in the manner set
forth in claim 1 on appeal, is also unpersuasive. In our opinion
the flap of Jory is capable of such resilient flexing when the
mailer form web (12) is used in an appropriate automatic insertion
15
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007