Appeal No. 98-0609
Application 08/490,203
impermissible hindsight would have enabled one of ordinary
skill to achieve the claimed invention based upon the Finley
disclosure. Since the evidence before us would not have
rendered obvious the claimed invention, we are constrained to
reverse the rejection of claim 1.
As to the respective rejections of dependent claims 3, 4,
and 11 through 16, which rely upon the Finley document in
combination with other applied prior art, we determine that
the additional art does not overcome the deficiency of the
Finley reference. More specifically, this panel of the board
concludes that the electrical conductor of Pond with sectional
bands or zones of different shades of color, the color guide
for fishing lures of Wilbourn (lengths of cord successively of
different colors), and the ornamental metal tubing of Dolan
(ornamentation that is variable and never twice alike) would3
likewise not have been suggestive to one having ordinary skill
in the art of a long flexible member, subject to tangling,
with the required code along its length that substantially
3We share appellant’s point of view (main brief, page 8) that Dolan does not
address a long flexible member that is subject to tangling.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007