Appeal No. 96-3033
Application 08/139,574
First, because the Church device is held in place by
friction, and because of the way Church’s parts cooperate with
each other and with the door and doorjamb, the key 10 is
susceptible to becoming dislodged by rattling the door back and
forth. In this regard, see the discussion in Church at page 2,
lines 74-87. For this reason, Church’s design calls for the
provision of some ancillary means to ensure that the key does not
become dislodged. The same cannot be said of Reed. This is so
because Reed relies on gravity to hold the plate 20 in place.
Accordingly, it is not clear to us that one of ordinary skill in
the art, having before him the teachings of Reed and Church,
would see any need whatsoever for providing an ancillary
restraint arrangement like that of Church in Reed.
Second, although not required by the claims, appellant’s pin
is inserted into a hole in the plate and a hole in the door to
prevent rotation of the plate. Indeed, the provision of any
ancillary elongate plate restraining means in Reed that includes
a hole in the plate 20 would appear to require the provision of
at least one other pin receiving hole somewhere in order to
prevent rotation of the plate. In our view, Church provides no
such a teaching.
Third, assuming that the artisan would have been motivated
to provide Church’s ancillary pin and opening means in Reed, the
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007