Appeal No. 1998-0402
Application No. 08/490,046
on the fact that the indicator stem in Sturm is limited in its
outward movement by virtue of the fact that it is integral
with the sleeve. Thus, no motivation would have existed for
one of ordinary skill in the art to provide stepped sides in
the recess for the purpose of limiting its outward movement,
which is one of the explicit reasons behind the presence of
this feature in Kunnecke. The other reason this is provided
in Kunnecke is to define a reservoir to receive a specific
amount of melted thermoplastic material so that the stem is
driven outward a precisely defined distance, a requirement
that is not present in the Sturm arrangement. It also is
notable that Kunnecke has voiced no concern for the problem of
molten material escaping from the recess, even though the
disclosed construction inherently might prevent this from
occurring, and thus suggestion to modify Sturm on the basis of
solving this problem is lacking.
From our perspective, the only suggestion for combining
the teachings of Sturm and Kunnecke in the manner set forth by
the examiner in the rejection is found in the hindsight
accorded one who first viewed the appellants’ disclosure.
This, of course, is
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007