Appeal No. 1999-2849
Application No. 08/690,966
would have been led to this combination of references, simply
to "[use] that which the inventor taught against its teacher."
W. L. Gore v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ
303, 312-13 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Upon our review of Storck, we find that Storck teaches in
column 8, line 63, through column 9, line 2, the following
The cards are inserted laterally from the left and
the right, or from the top or bottom of the casing
of the equipment 1 through an entry slot or throat 4
and 6 inside which they are guided, retained and
locked in place by means that are not shown on this
figure. The device is perfectly symmetrical and the
cards can be inserted into either one of the two
slots.
Furthermore, we find that Storck teaches in column 10, lines
51 through 56, the following:
Ranged in a symmetrical fashion in correspondence to
each one of the slots 4 and 6 of FIG. 1, the device
includes elements 15a, 15b, 15c; 15a', 15b', 15c'
fitted with contacts 16 designed to set up the
electrical and transactional interface between each
one of the cards 3 and 5.
Thus, we find that Storck teaches symmetrical entry slots 4
and 6 which fully enclose the Storck microcircuit cards. We
fail to find that Storck teaches or suggests the claimed
limitation "two insertion slots provided in an owner side and
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007