Appeal No. 1998-1931
Application No. 08/395,411
We fully appreciate the examiner’s assessment of the
Goodwin, Parker, Jr., Fowlkes, Peters, and Hill patents, and
the manner in which they are applied in the respective
rejections on appeal. As more fully explained below, the
difficulty that we have with, for example, the rejections of
claims 1 and 15, respectively, is that only reliance upon
appellant’s own teaching and hindsight would have enabled one
of ordinary skill in the art to seek out and combine the
applied prior art, as proposed.
As can be discerned from a review of the Goodwin
reference, the torsion land skier thereof utilizes barrel-
shaped rollers having a convex periphery (column 1, lines 43
through 47). On the other hand, the Parker, Jr. patent
addresses a roller shoe with rollers of varying length
conforming to the contour of the shoe, while the patent to
Fowlkes teaches a laminated skate wheel
(Fig. 2) that includes outer discs 16, 18 of substantially
greater hardness and durability than an annular member 14.
Considering, in particular, the barrel-shaped roller intended
by patentee Goodwin, it at once becomes apparent to us that
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007