Appeal No. 1999-0616
Application 08/443,152
bracket 20 at its left hand end by an unidentified element
that the examiner regards as a ring-like washer. This
inconsistency regarding which element the retaining pin is
secured to, and how the retaining pin is retained in operative
position, makes it difficult to determine exactly how Moser’s
arrangement differs from the claimed invention, and
accordingly what must be modified in order to arrive at the
claimed subject matter. This ambiguity regarding the teaching
of the primary reference in the critical area of the retaining
pin constitutes an additional reason necessitating reversal of
the standing § 103 rejection of claim 1.
For these reasons, we shall not sustain the standing 35
U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 1, or claim 12 which depends
therefrom, based on Moser.4
Turning to the rejection of claims 2-10 as being
4In light of our conclusion that the examiner’s foundation
position concerning the obviousness of reversing certain parts
of Moser to arrive at the claimed subject matter is flawed, it
is not necessary for us to address the examiner’s additional
determination that the securing means of Moser (i.e., the
“ring-like washer means” found by the examiner to be present
at the left hand end of Moser’s retaining pin 40) constitutes
a 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph, equivalent of appellants’
claimed “means for securing said insertable means in said
operative position” (claim 1, last mentioned means).
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007