Appeal No. 97-3703 Page 16
Application No. 08/110,349
20 for motion therewith) to achieve the above-noted advantages
would have been obvious.
While the alignment member disclosed by the appellants'
admitted prior art is mounted to the frame so as to pivot into
and out of alignment with the bottom of the outlet opening and
thus does not move rectilinearly as claimed, whether the
alignment member is mounted in the Walker machine so as to
travel in a curvilinear path about a fixed pivot point or in a
rectilinear path into and out of alignment with the outlet
opening is considered to be an obvious matter of design
choice. One of ordinary skill in the art would have
understood that the particular path traveled by the alignment
member is immaterial, as long as the alignment member is
aligned with the outlet opening in its upper-most position
and, further, would have
understood how to mount the alignment member for travel in any
desired path. Where a change solves no stated problem, it is
considered to be a mere matter of design choice and therefore
obvious. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 555, 188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA
1975).
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007