Appeal No. 1999-0960
Application No. 08/785,437
protecting the
delicate folds
of the pleats.
"Even when obviousness is based on a single prior art
reference, there must be a showing of a suggestion or
motivation to modify the teachings of that reference." In re
Kotzab, 217 F.3d 1365, 1370, 55 USPQ2d 1313, 1316-17 (Fed.
Cir. 2000). In the present case, we do not consider that such
a showing has been made. As mentioned above, Wright discloses
that the purpose of screens 2 and 3 is to prevent distortion
of the filter and maintain uniform spacing between the fold
backs. There would have been no motivation or suggestion for
one of ordinary skill to modify the Wright filter, as proposed
by the examiner, by aligning the screen wires along the fold
backs in order to protect the fold backs, because in Wright
that function is already performed by the capping 6, nor is
there any indication that additional strengthening would be
desirable.
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1 and 13, and
likewise of claims 2 to 12, 14 and 15 dependent thereon, will
not be sustained.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007