Appeal No. 1997-3798 Page 8
Application No. 08/272,018
1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988) and In re Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013,
1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972).
Independent claim 1 includes the limitation that at least
one of the keyhole slots in the flexible elongated backing bar
include an opening which is enlarged relative to its
connecting portion. Independent claim 2 includes the
limitation that at least one of the keyhole slots in the
flexible backing bar include a rectangular portion and a
circular portion wherein the diameter of the circular portion
is greater than the width of the rectangular portion.
The examiner determined (answer, p. 5) that the above-
noted limitations of claims 1 and 2 were not taught by
Eriksson. The examiner then concluded that the claimed shape
of the keyhole slot would have been a matter of choice which a
person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious
absent a showing that the particular shape produced unexpected
results.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007