Appeal No. 1997-1812
Application 08/055,382
references which taught both the basic concept of
adjustability in the same art area as the claimed device, and
the specific joints being claimed. Thus, in Stevens, the
examiner provided sufficient evidence from which to conclude
that the claimed subject matter would have been obvious. Such
is clearly not the case here.
As to claims 32 and 33, the examiner has cited no
evidence to establish that the construction of Coffey is the
“functional equivalent,” whatever that may be, of the claimed
subject matter. In any event, the mere existence of
functional and mechanical equivalence does not establish
obviousness. In other words,
components which are functionally equivalent to each other are
not necessarily obvious in view of one another. In re Scott,
323 F.2d 1016, 1019-20, 139 USPQ 297, 299 (CCPA 1963).
In the present case, the examiner has failed to indicate
any teaching in Coffey or any prior knowledge generally
available to one of ordinary skill in the art that would have
led an ordinarily skilled artisan to equip Coffey’s turntable
14
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007