Appeal No. 1997-3989
Application No. 08/424,067
the driver element of this reference does not possess two of the limitations of independent
claim 1. The driver element of the reference (1) cannot be said to extend parallel to the
longitudinal axis of the driver tool, and (2) each driver element of the reference has been
represented to us as not disposed between the inner and outer walls without extending into
the opening of the tube portion. Without clear evidence, we must accept these
representations from appellant's counsel as to the scope and content of this publication.
We note that both references are directed to the driving of metallic screws. In fact,
Rich is directed to the driving of titanium screws and discloses transferring torque to the
rotatable fastener by a plurality of pins 40. The insertion ends of pins 42 can be rounded
and are inserted into holes 22 to transfer the torque. The opposite ends of the pins 44 are
connected to a pin plate 46 which is slidably shiftable on a lift collar 48. Rich's flat bladed-
pins 156 are mounted in the same manner. Thus, it is apparent to us that Rich teaches
mounting the driver elements slidably on the end of the coaxial open tube rather shifting the
entire tube via a nut at the opposite end of the handle. The examiner's proposed
combination, i.e., looking to the shape of the screw engaging members in Rich, is clearly
based on impermissible hindsight in that the teaching of Rich as to the mounting of the
pins is not followed, but only a single feature of Rich has been picked for modifying the
basic reference. Such picking and choosing of features from the secondary reference is
the hallmark of impermissible hindsight.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007