Appeal No. 98-1459 Page 8
Application No. 08/309,756
consistent with the specification. See In re Sneed, 710 F.2d2
1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983). When this is
done, it is our view that Gold does not teach or suggest a
snap clip. That is, when an artisan would have modified
Breslow by the teachings of Gold the artisan would have
replaced Breslow's snap-fit connection with the sliding
connection of Gold. Accordingly, the device resulting from
the combined teachings of Breslow and Gold is not the claimed
invention. It follows that we cannot sustain the examiner's
rejection of claims 1 through 9.
2See page 5, lines 8-22, of the specification which
explains how the appellants' snap clip 31 engages the upper
clip 25.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007