Appeal No. 96-3586
Application No. 08/262,848
the pressure applying element in the alternative embodiment of
Fig. 7 is simply a pressure applying instrument rather than a
"porous marking pen applicator" as the appellant would have us
believe. As to the appellant's reference to a particular
thickness of the metallized coating on the graphic product or
"part" of Altman, independent claim 14 does not require that
the etchable surface be of any particular thickness.3
In view of the foregoing, we will sustain the rejection
of claim 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Altman.
Turning to the rejection of claim 14 under 35 U.S.C. §
103 based on the teachings of Lawson, the appellant concedes
that the Lawson patent places a visible mark on the outer
layer or covering of the "sleeve label" 22 by etching but,
nevertheless, contends that "[t]here is no indication that the
part itself, i.e., the wire, is to be etched" (brief, page 6).
We must point out, however, that not withstanding the fact
that the outer layer or covering (col. 3, lines 8 and 9) of
sleeve label 22 is subsequently placed over a wire, this
3It is well settled that features not claimed may not be
relied upon in support of patentability. In re Self, 671 F.2d
1344, 1348, 213 USPQ 1, 5 (CCPA 1982).
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007