Appeal No. 96-2623
Application No. 08/240,095
presumed on the part of those practicing in the art (see In re
Sovish, 769 F.2d 738, 743, 226 USPQ 771, 774 (Fed. Cir. 1985)).
Second, it would have been apparent to an artisan that the radius
of curvature of Johnston's concave pressing surface 12 is greater
then the radius of curvature of Johnston's convex pressing
surface 13 since all points on the concave pressing surface 12
are equal distance from corresponding opposite points on the
convex pressing surface 13. Third, it is our opinion that10
Johnston's teaching that the radius of curvature of Johnston's
concave pressing surface 12 is greater then the radius of
curvature of Johnston's convex pressing surface 13 would have
been ample suggestion and motivation to an artisan to apply that
teaching to the concave and convex pressing surfaces of Stiff.
In that regard, it is our opinion that based on the teachings of
Johnston, an artisan would have decided that Stiff's teaching
that the concave surface 46 corresponds to the convex surface 48
means that the radius of curvature of the concave surface would
have been slightly greater then the radius of curvature of the
convex surface. Lastly, while the appellants have pointed to the
10That is, if the convex pressing surface 13 had a radius
of curvature of R' and all points on the concave pressing surface
12 are spaced a distance D' from corresponding opposite points on
the convex pressing surface 13, then the concave pressing surface
12 must have a radius of curvature of R'+D'.
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007