Interference No. 103,036
Sterling contemplates the use of any chemical which can
be impregnated into the space (8) and which will change color
when a current is passed therethrough. Consequently, we agree
with the party Burroughs et al. that there is no motivation or
suggestion in Sterling to utilize any indicating device other
than the chemical type disclosed therein. We also agree with the
party Burroughs et al. that even if it were suggested to combine
Sterling with Kiernan or Parker '020, which it is not, then the
combined references would not disclose any switch means.
The experts (Messrs. Alan Palmer and Barnett testifying
on behalf of the party Wang et al., and Mr. Chung-Chiun Liu
testifying on behalf of the party Tucholski) testified that the
Sterling patent does not disclose or suggest the use of a switch,
i.e., clips 9 and 10 of Figures 1 and 2 do not act as a switch
when attached to the battery posts 11 and 12 and the embodiment
of Figures 3 and 4 is not a typical switch. WR 1468 to 1470,
1480 and 1481; TR 2179 to 2182, 2185, 2186, 2585 to 2586.
Assuming that it would have been obvious or somehow
suggested to add a switch means to the combined references, we
agree with the party Burroughs et al. that the switch means of
independent claims 1, 24 and 44 and those dependent thereon,
means for forming a switch as required by independent claims 16,
-28-
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007