Appeal No. 1998-3420
Application 08/597,033
that the locking/stop pin arrangement of Thorud is so
unrelated to the disc holders of Reisman and Cheng that it
would not have fairly been suggestive of the type of change in
Reisman or Cheng urged by the examiner. In this regard, we
view the examiner’s position as being based on hindsight
derived from appellants’ own teachings, since the references
themselves do not provide any suggestion or incentive for
modifying the central hole of the disc holders of Reisman or
Cheng so as to have a recessed depression and a rosette sized
as required in appellants’ claim 15 on appeal. Therefore,
the examiner’s rejection of claim 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
based on Reisman or Cheng and Thorud will not be sustained.
The last of the examiner’s rejections for our review
is that of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Potter. As we noted earlier, claim 10 is
directed to the subject matter seen in Figures 37-44 of the
application drawings. After a careful review of the disc
holder seen in Potter (Fig. 1), we must agree with appellants
that this reference lacks any teaching or suggestion of “an
14
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007