Appeal No. 97-0593
Application 08/365,906
would seem to be rather speculative to say that Stashko fairly
teaches the width relationship between the recesses and the
groove as set forth in appellant's claims on appeal.
In addition, we observe that all of the drawings in
Stashko show the recesses (36) as being substantially entirely
located in the inclined surface (24) of the groove that is spaced
away from the cutting edge and adjacent the raised seating sur-
face of the insert. By contrast, the small recesses (18) in the
cutting insert of Warren are shown and expressly described as
being formed and spaced along the length of the cutting edge "in
the uppermost portion of said planar descending wall" (20) of the
cutting insert. See particularly, Figures 1-5, 7 and 8 of Warren
and column 1, lines 60-67.
Considering (1) the distinct differences between the
cutting inserts of Stashko and Warren, both structurally and
operationally, (2) the declaration filed by appellant on
March 25, 1996, and (3) the arguments made by appellant in both
the brief and the reply brief, it is our opinion that the
examiner's combination of Stashko and Warren is based on
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007