Appeal No. 2002-0930
Application 09/291,828
pivoted at two opposite end of the driven link and driving
link.”1
After careful consideration, we must agree with appellants’
arguments (brief, pages 3-4) that Cheng ‘402 does not teach,
suggest or show an intermediate link in Figure 2 thereof, and
that the mere fact that some form of intermediate link was known
in the prior art (as exemplified by Figure 5 of Cheng ‘402)
provides no basis whatsoever for incorporating any such
intermediate link in the simplified coin release mechanism shown
in Figures 1 and 2 of Cheng ‘402. Like appellants, it is our
view that the mechanisms of Prior Art Figures 3-5 in the applied
patent are so different from that seen in Figures 1 and 2 thereof
that it would be illogical for a person of ordinary skill in the
art to attempt a modification as urged by the examiner,
especially since the patentees expressly indicate that an
objective of their invention is to make a payphone coin release
mechanism which is simplified as compared to the conventional
structures so as to reduce manufacturing costs, and integrated
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007