Appeal No. 98-0005
Application No. 08/613,808
art would have been led to modify a prior art reference or to
combine reference teachings to arrive at the claimed
invention. See Ex parte Clapp, 227 USPQ 972, 973 (Bd. Pat.
App. & Int. 1985). To this end, the requisite motivation must
stem from some teaching, suggestion or inference in the prior
art as a whole or from the knowledge generally available to
one of ordinary skill in the art and not from the appellant's
disclosure. See, for example, Uniroyal, Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley
Corp., 837 F.2d 1044, 1052, 5 USPQ2d 1434, 1052 (Fed. Cir.),
cert. denied, 488 U.S. 825 (1988). The appellant’s
invention is directed to clamping a work piece in place
tightly pressed against the surface of a base plate. Among
the structural limitations set forth in claim 1, the sole
independent claim, is an arm having a cam surface with a
varying diameter around the pivot pin upon which the arm is
mounted,
said cam surface having a plurality of angled
grooves for engaging said work piece and forcing
said work piece toward said base plate, pins and
other clamps as said cam surface is pivoted into
pressure engagement with said work piece.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007