Appeal No. 98-1193
Application No. 08/448,687
marks of said another [second] set being at spaced intervals
different from said periodic marks of said one [first] set.”
The examiner finds in Sobjack all of the subject matter
recited in claim 1 except for the double set of markings, the
T-shaped configuration of the marks, and the different space
intervals of the periodic marks of the two sets of marks. It
is the examiner’s position, however, that Jansen teaches
providing a double set of differently spaced interval index
markings placed on opposite edges of a tape, that Walker
teaches the required T-shaped markings, and that it would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine
the teachings of the three references in such a manner as to
render the subject matter of claim 1 obvious. See Answer,
pages 4 and 5. As can be expected, in the Brief the appellant
takes issue with these conclusions, and provides a number of
reasons why the rejection is defective. We find ourselves in
agreement with the appellant.
Our quarrel with the examiner’s position begins with the
conclusion that combining the teachings of Sobjack and Jansen
would have yielded the required two sets of markings having
different spaced intervals. First of all, to the extent that
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007