Appeal No. 96-0141
Application No. 08/084,097
Claims 5 through 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over Linne in view of Pasco, "the admitted
prior art as discussed on page 3 of the instant
specification", and Hirota (Answer, page 3). Claims 8 through
10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
the references applied against claims 5 through 7 further in
view of Patel (Answer, page 5). We reverse both of the
examiner’s rejections for reasons which follow.
OPINION
Conventional manufacturing techniques in this particular
art comprise the installation of an independent balance weight
separately from the pointer body after completion of the
pointer (Brief, page 2; specification, page 3, last paragraph;
and Pasco, column 1, line 42-column 2, line 2; column 3, lines
11-14).
The process of manufacture recited in appealed claim 5
comprises integrally molding the pointer body with the balance
weight section comprising resin and metal powder, thereby
making it unnecessary to install and fix the balance weight
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007