Appeal No. 97-1473
Application 08/492,376
with regard to the numbered pieces of the device in Albright
and that of appellant's prior patent claims 1 and 15, we
consider that the combination proposed by the examiner would
not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
absent the hindsight benefit of appellant's own teachings in
the present application before us on appeal. Accordingly, we
will not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 1 through
7 under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type
double patenting.
Next we look to the examiner's rejection of claims 8 and
9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the combined teachings of
Stebing
and Albright. In this instance, appellant asserts that
Stebing
discloses circular disks (e.g., 16) which have numbers on only
one side of the disks, and lacks any motivation for numbering
the opposite sides of the disks therein. In addition,
appellant has provided two affidavits from persons skilled in
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007