Appeal 97-1906
Application 08/163,084
also discloses that the tubular rigid member is used for
reinforcing concrete structures. Therefore, it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to
have ridges on the inner or outer surface for the
advantage of a wedging action and compression forces.
7. There is no suggestion, teaching, reason or
motivation set forth in Yee for moving the inner ridges to
become outer ridges.
8. The sole suggestion in the record for having
ridges on the outer surface of the element is found in
applicants' specification.
B. Discussion
In our opinion, nothing in Yee would suggest the presence
on the Yee reinforcing element of ridges on the outer surface.
The examiner has not provided sufficient prior art evidence to
support his finding that one skilled in the art would have
been motivated to place outer ridges on the Yee reinforcing
element. Accordingly, the examiner's rejection is based on
impermissible hindsight. In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392,
1395, 170 USPQ 209, 212 (CCPA 1971) (obviousness judgments are
necessarily based on hindsight; so long as judgment takes into
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007