Ex parte STEKETEE - Page 10




          Appeal No. 1997-4430                                                        
          Application 08/421,463                                                      


          art alone, would have provided the essential motivation to                  
          configure the distinguishable single article taught by Laurent              
          with the particular shape taken from the tubular fabric 2 of                
          Hyodo.  At this point, we particularly note that, even if so                
          modified, the resulting pipe would not be that as claimed                   
          since adoption of the shape of the folded tubular fabric 2 of               
          Hyodo with its turnover 8 (Fig. 1) would not effect a                       
          configuration of legs nested “to minimize the overall                       
          thickness of the folded pipe” (as seen in appellant’s Fig. 8),              
          an express requirement of each of claims 39 and 65.  Thus, the              
          claimed invention would not have been rendered obvious on the               
          basis of the Laurent and Hyodo disclosures.  As to the Harper               
          patent, it is apparent to us that it clearly fails to overcome              
          the noted deficiencies of Laurent and Hyodo.                                


               In summary, this panel of the board has:                               


               reversed the rejection of claims 39 through 41 and 60                  
          through 65 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by                 
          Laurent;                                                                    


                                          10                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007