Appeal No. 97-1439 Page 12
Application No. 08/417,981
C-shaped annular collar 40, having an inside diameter less than
the diameter of the male protrusion 26 and an outside diameter
greater than the inside diameter of the hole 36 in the second
rail member 30, is positioned within the two grooves 22 and 32 to
prevent the longitudinal movement of the first railing member 20
relative to the second railing member 30.
The examiner determined (answer, pp. 3-4) that Namur only
lacks the claimed stop ring being split and that
[t]o one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
invention was made, it would have been obvious to modify the
stop ring of Namur by incorporating a slit to create a split
stop ring as taught by Garringer in order to make the ring
more flexible and easier to relocate to other top post
grooves.
We do not agree. For the reasons set forth by the
appellants (brief, pp. 5-6), it is our opinion that one of
ordinary skill in the art would not have modified the stop ring
Of Namur to include a slit to create a split stop ring since the
inclusion of a slit in the stop ring would be contrary to Namur's
specific goal of providing a watertight seal.
In summary, we see no motivation in the applied prior art of
why one skilled in the art would have modified the device of
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007