Appeal No. 1996-0345 Page 6
Application No. 08/101,999
In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 177 (CCPA
1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 1057 (1968).
The examiner has not supplied the necessary evidence,
that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized
the desirability of adapting the shape of the blade to
correspond with the concave curvature of the backing roll in
order to effect a uniform coating, to support the conclusion
of obviousness in this case. Thus, especially in light of the
above-noted deficiencies of Barusten, it is our opinion that
the examiner's conclusion of obviousness stems from
impermissible hindsight reconstruction. Accordingly, we
cannot sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 5 through 7.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 5 through 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is REVERSED.
REVERSED
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007