Appeal No. 97-2820
Application No. 08/432,443
Appellants argue (Brief, pages 5 and 6) that:
Nowhere does Hernqvist et al. disclose four ledges and
nowhere does Hernqvist et al. disclose any second part
having offsets at its corners. There is no way that
Hernqvist et al. and Naiki can be combined to achieve
the present invention, and there is certainly no
suggestion in either of these references that would
make the presently claimed invention obvious.
We agree. In the absence of a prima facie case of obviousness,
the rejection of claims 6 and 7 is reversed.
Turning to the obviousness rejection of claims 3 and 4,
neither Greninger nor Gerlach discloses an electrode with one
part having four spaced ledges and another part having four
corners for connection with the four spaced ledges. The
obviousness rejection of claims 3 and 4 is reversed because
neither Greninger nor Gerlach is capable of curing the
shortcomings in the teachings of Naiki and Hernqvist.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007