Appeal No. 96-1476
Application 08/186,515
and an alternative embodiment in Figure 1 as "slit 25", answer
at page 6. We note that Steinke refers to 25 and 35 as bore
portions (column 2 lines 41-44 and 55). The dictionary
defines bore as a "cylindrical hole" and slit as a "long
narrow cut or opening".2
We do not agree with the Examiner that Steinke meets
or suggests the slit claimed by Appellants. "Bore", as
disclosed by Steinke and as defined in the dictionary, is not
a "slit" as claimed by Appellants and as defined in the
dictionary.
We also consider the Examiner's argument that it is
a mere alternative of Steinke to locate a slit on the threaded
portion, it being a rearranging/relocating of parts involving
only routine skill in the art (answer at page 5). The Federal
Circuit states that "[t]he mere fact that the prior art may be
modified in the manner suggested by the Examiner does not make
the modification obvious unless the prior art suggested the
desirability of the modification." In re Fritch, 972 F.2d
1260, 1266 n.14, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783-84 n.14 (Fed. Cir.
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, pages 169 and 1109 (1986)2
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007