Appeal No. 98-2049
Application 08/549,061
is nothing in Sauerbrey’s use of hook and loop material to
releasably position a high jump ribbon which would have
suggested the use of such material in place of Schweitzer’s
lasso keepers. The examiner’s reasoning to the contrary (see
page 4 in the answer) clearly is predicated on speculation,
unfounded assumptions and hindsight reconstruction. Thus,
here again we are constrained to conclude that the reference
combination relied upon by the examiner fails to establish a
prima facie case of obviousness with respect to the subject
matter recited in claims 6, 9 and 10, and in claim 11 which
depends from claim 10.
In light of the foregoing, we shall not sustain the
standing 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of claims 1 through 11.3
3Since the references applied by the examiner fail to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to
the subject matter recited in claims 1 through 11, we find no
need to consider in any detail the appellant’s rebuttal
evidence of non-obviousness. We would note in passing,
however, that the showings of commercial success in the
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007