Appeal No. 2000-1315
Application 09/152,563
however, there is nothing in the combined teachings of these
references which would have suggested this particular
combination. Although Famolare’s slide pads and Bauer’s
outsoles have some characteristics in common (e.g., both are
replaceable ground-contacting elements), in an overall sense
they are quite distinctive in structure and function.
Famolare’s slide pad is not an outsole as in Bauer, but is
merely an accessory attachable to an outsole. In addition,
there is no indication in the prior art that this slide pad
needs any additional securement to its sole, much less the
level of securement furnished by an upstanding rim or strip of
the sort disclosed by Bauer. Moreover, neither of these
references contemplates the wear reducing benefits afforded by
the appellant’s tip. In this light, it is evident that the
only suggestion for selectively picking the upstanding rim
from Bauer’s outsole construction and applying it to
Famolare’s
sliding pads stems from hindsight knowledge impermissibly
derived from the appellant’s disclosure. Hence, Famolare and
Bauer fall short of establishing a prima facie case of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007