Appeal No. 1997-2118
Application No. 08/119,163
We agree with appellants’ arguments. Whether or not the
modified Landa canister will be cheaper to manufacture and
will result in a canister that is simple to operate is purely
a matter of speculation on the part of the examiner. Inasmuch
as Landa discloses horizontally mounted toner containers 66
(Figure 1), and Uhlig only discloses dispensing nozzles at the
top of the fluid dispensers, neither reference before us takes
advantage of the “forces of gravity.” As a result thereof,
the examiner has not shown a teaching of having valves at
opposite ends nor has the examiner provided a convincing line
of reasoning concerning the same. Thus, in the absence of
appellants’ disclosed and claimed invention, nothing in the
record before us supports the examiner’s proposed
modifications of the applied references.
In summary, the examiner has not established the prima
facie
obviousness of the claimed invention.
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 36, 39, 43,
45, 47, 49, 51 and 53 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007