Appeal No. 1997-0380
Application No. 08/368,099
nothing in the combined teachings of Meyer and Farrington
which would fairly suggest providing the elongated stud of
Meyer with a
frustoconical opening as illustrated by Farrington in Figure 4
for the purpose of receiving a flat head screw and, at the
same
time, discarding the flared end of the screw body illustrated
by Farrington (which is provided by Farrington to form the
frustoconical opening) and retaining the disc-shaped head [12]
taught by Meyer.
From our perspective, the examiner has impermissibly
relied upon the appellant’s own teachings in arriving at a
conclusion of obviousness. This being the case, we will not
sustain the rejection of the claim under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based
on the combined teachings of Meyer and Farrington.
In summary, both of the examiner's rejections of the
claim under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are reversed.
REVERSED
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007