Appeal No. 1997-3087
Application 08/541,519
Guth. The dissimilarity in construction and purpose of the4
latches of Guth and Bisbing undercuts the examiner’s position
that a structure containing all of the limitations of
independent claim 1 would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art from a consideration of the combined
teachings of the applied references. Fifth, the switch
actuator 44 of Guth that the examiner equates to the claimed
protruding tab is located on the pivoting latch bolt 42.
Thus, at best, Guth would appear to suggest placing a switch
actuating tab on Bisbing’s latch-like toggle member 24 rather
than on the retaining means 34.
Where prior art references require a selective
combination to render obvious a claimed invention, there must
be some reason for the combination other than hindsight
gleaned from the invention disclosure, Interconnect Planning
4In Guth, the biasing force for the toggle mechanism is
supplied by what appears to be a conventional helical spring
88. See Figures 1 and 2, and column 4, lines 1-8.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007