Appeal No. 1999-2010
Application No. 08/684,635
appellant by merely reciting columns and line numbers from the
Smith and Southland patents.
First, we note the inconsistency in the examiner’s
position. The examiner alleges that the Smith patent shows
the use of molds in the manufacture of a drill bit, however,
at the same time, the examiner suggests using Southland for
the teaching of using a mold for the manufacture of a drill
bit. Our own reading of the Smith patent confirms the
observation made by appellant. Along the appellant’s line of
reasoning, we quote from Smith at column 2, lines 59 to 64
that:
The present invention contemplates a method of
fabricating matrix-type rotary bits for subterranean
drilling without the need for preparation and use of
molds as employed in the prior art for definition of
the bit profile, including the face, nose, flank,
shoulder, and gage as well as other, freer details
of exterior surface topography of the bit.
That is, the Smith reference discloses the design of a bit
from a CAD program fed directly into a numerically controlled
machine to manufacture the bit without having to first make a
mold and then manufacture the prototype. We also agree with
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007