Appeal No. 1997-2251
Application 8/251,385
disclosure (page 6; figure 2, item 30). The examiner does not
point to a disclosure in Funck of what the examiner considers
to be an undercut region.
The examiner argues that undercut regions are “well known
in the molding art and are deemed demonstrated by the grooved
portions provided in pins (74) for holding the article in
place” (answer, page 5). The only applied reference which has
a pin (74) is Miller. In this reference, pin 74 has grooves
which form the threads in the cap. The examiner does not
explain why one of ordinary skill in the art would have
considered such grooves to be an undercut region as that term
is used by appellants.
Conclusion
For the above reasons, we find that the examiner has not
set forth a factual basis which is sufficient for supporting a
conclusion of obviousness of the invention recited in any of
appellants’ claims. Accordingly, we reverse the examiner’s
rejection.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007