Appeal No. 2003-0666 Page 7
Application No. 08/891,351
bells of said 90° elbow and said tee fitting” (emphasis added), for the bushings
disclosed therein fit only one end of each 90° elbow (the expanded end), and do not fit
the other end of the elbow or any of the tee fittings.
The examiner’s theory seems to be that (1) modern thermoplastic fittings all have
the same size attachment bells, (2) it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
in the art to employ thermoplastic fittings in the Wise arrangement, (3) this would result
in all of the bells of the tees and the elbows being the same size, and (4) the bushing
used in Wise to connect the bells to the drain fittings then would fit all of the bells,
rather than just to ones on the drain fittings. Implicit in this theory is that the expanded
bell fittings in Wise would be replaced by bells of the same size as the other bells.
From our perspective, however, even if suggestion were to exist for substituting
thermoplastic fittings for the metal fittings disclosed by Wise, we fail to perceive any
teaching, suggestion or incentive which would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to
reduce the size of Wise’s expanded bells to the same size as those of the other bells
on the ells and the tee. Support for this position is found in the fact that Wise does not
recognize the problem solved by the appellant, and thus there would seem to be no
reason to deviate from bell sizes disclosed in the reference.
This being the case, it is our conclusion that Wise and AAPA do not establish a
prima facie case of obviousness with regard to the subject matter recited in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007