Appeal No. 95-1971
Application No. 08/126,130
John E. Brown (the appellant) appeals from the final
rejection of claims 3-6, 9-18 and 20-22, the only claims
remaining in the application.
We REVERSE.
The appellant's invention pertains to an article for use
in catching fish that comprises a non-toxic, lead-free
underwater fishing device, at least a portion of which
contains a bismuth alloy. Independent claim 21 is further
illustrative of the appealed subject matter and a copy thereof
may be found in the appendix to the brief.
The reference relied on by the examiner is:
British patent (Jukes) 2207841A Feb. 15, 1989
The following rejection is before us for consideration:2
Claims 3-6, 9-18 and 20-22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over the British patent to Jukes.
GB 2207841A (GB) [Jukes] recognizes the use of
non-lead metals in a fishing device to prevent lead
poisoning but fails to show the device containing
[a] bismuth [alloy]. However, metals such as tin,
2In the answer the examiner made a new ground of
rejection based on the combined teachings of Jukes and the
Metals Handbook (see page 4 of the answer). Inexplicably,
however, the examiner expressly withdrew this rejection in the
communication mailed on July 21, 1998 (Paper No. 50).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007