Appeal No. 96-4162
Application 08/313,901
apparent that the reference combination proposed by the examiner stems only from an
impermissible hindsight reconstruction of the appellant’s invention wherein the examiner
has used the claims as a template to selectively piece together isolated disclosures in the
prior art.
For the reasons discussed above, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 rejection of independent claims 1 and 3, or claims 2 through 4 and 6 which depend
therefrom, as being unpatentable over any one of Luther ‘891, Luther ‘898, Schwartzburg
or Zushi in view of either Wilkinson or Baugh.
NEW GROUND OF REJECTION UNDER 37 CFR § 1.196(b)
Under the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b), we make the following new ground of
rejection.
Claims 1 through 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Blenkush.
With regard to claims 1 and 3, Blenkush discloses a mold apparatus and method
for molding a male insert (12), the insert comprising a part line free cylindrical seal (20).
The cylindrical seal is frusto-conical in shape (column 6, lines 9 through 12). The mold
apparatus comprises a longitudinally retractable mold element member (54) for forming
the part line free cylindrical seal (column 7, lines 19 through 24) and two laterally
13
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007