Appeal 2007-2121
Application 10/705,083
Examiner concludes it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
the art to modify Smith’s tubular stake with Selby’s reinforced widened top
end surface and Clarke’s frusto-conical wall region to better receive blows
from the shaft driver with greater strength against lateral action (id.; see also
10-11).
The Examiner finds Smith’s stake body is not disclosed to be formed
of a lightweight synthetic polymeric material, and Gipp discloses hollow
body 22 of flexible boundary marker 10 is made of PVC tubing (Answer 5,
citing Gipp col. 3, ll. 61-63; see also Answer 11). The Examiner concludes
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art to form
Smith’s tubular stake from PVC for durability as taught by Gipp (Answer 5).
The Examiner finds the pointed end of Smith’s stake driver does not extend
below the bottom end opening of the tubular stake, and Roger discloses
driving tube 1 into the ground by hammering with driver 3 having pointed
end 6 extending past the tube bottom opening to penetrate the surface (id.,
citing Roger col. 3, ll. 12-13, and Fig. 2; see also 11-12). The Examiner
concludes it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to
modify Smith’s shaft driver by extending the pointed end past the stake
bottom end opening to penetrate the surface the stake is driven into as taught
by Roger (id. 5-6).
With respect to claim 9, the Examiner contends the combined
teachings of Smith, Selby, Clarke, Gipp, and Roger do not disclose an end
cap having a filament bundle as an indicator flag which can be frictionally
retained in the top end opening of Smith’s tubular stake, and Anglea
discloses an end cap of a filament bundle 32 with an end cap formed by
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013