Appeal No. 95-4927
Serial No. 08/216,772
Statement, namely, Japan Application No. JP 631690050, of5
which an English language translation of the abstract was
provided. The abstract indicates, and the drawings show,
leads being bent so as to have their exterior end portions
alternately disposed in first and second parallel planes.
Appellants also give several reasons why the rejection
must fail even if it is assumed that the prior art teaches
positioning the leads in different planes. The first reason
is that Mizuguchi shows all leads in the same plane and thus
"teaches away" from disposing the leads in different planes
(Reply Brief at 6; Brief at 7). This argument is unconvincing
because Mizuguchi does not indicate that the leads should not
or cannot be disposed in different planes. See Para-Ordnance
Mfg. v. SGS Importers Int'l, 73 F.3d 1085, 1090, 37 USPQ2d
1237, 1241 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (holding that the Browning Hi-
Power handgun does not teach away from the claimed invention;
while it fails to disclose a converging frame, it does not
warn a person against using convergence).
5Paper No. 7.
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007