Appeal No. 96-3920
Application 08/151,891
6, and 12 standing or falling therewith; 37 CFR 1.192(c)(7).
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the issues raised in this
appeal, this panel of the board has carefully considered
appellants’ specification and claims, the applied teachings, 4 5
and the respective viewpoints of appellants and the examiner.
As a consequence of our review, we make the determinations
which follow.
We reverse the examiner’s respective rejections of
appellants’ claims.
The marking pen of independent claim 1 requires, inter
alia, a flexible body defining a cavity containing ink, and a
4We understand the recitation of “the pores” of said nib in claim 8,
line 4, and claim 10, line 6 to denote that the earlier recited “writing nib”,
in each claim, clearly includes pores.
5In our evaluation of the applied teachings, we have considered all of
the disclosure of each teaching for what it would have fairly taught one of
ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507,
510 (CCPA 1966). Additionally, this panel of the board has taken into account
not only the specific teachings, but also the inferences which one skilled in
the art would reasonably have been expected to draw from the disclosure. See
In re Preda 401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007