Appeal No. 1998-0682
Application 08/724,306
for rolling operations can be produced by extrusion, which process is characterized by the examiner as
being an efficient technique for forming strips having complicated sectional configurations. From the
collective teachings of Kennedy and Hitachi Cable, the examiner concludes that it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce the slabs for the rolling process in Kennedy by
extrusion rather than casting by following the suggestion found in Hitachi Cable.
However, since Kennedy expressly deals only with tapered metal slabs, while the method of
claim 1 on appeal specifically deals with metal profiles having a stepped portion defining different wall
thicknesses and an opposing side of each profile that is a continuous flat face, the examiner has
additionally taken the position that the particular profile provided in Kennedy as modified by Hitachi
Cable is merely an obvious exercise of mechanical skill depending on the characteristics desired in the
final product, i.e., stepped rather than tapered, and not a patentable distinction absent a disclosure of
criticality in the solution of stated problems with the use of a specific profile.
Like appellants (brief, pages 8-10), we find the examiner’s rejection of independent claim 1 on
appeal to be improper. Simply stated, nothing in either Kennedy or Hitachi Cable teaches or suggests
a method of using stepped extruded profiles (producible from a hollow profile) in the manner set forth in
appellants’ claim 1 on appeal, and the examiner’s position that the stepped profile is merely an exercise
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007