Appeal No. 1998-0819
Application 08/541,656
USPQ2d at 1239, citing W.L. Gore & Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock,
Inc., 721 F.2d at 1551, 1553, 220 USPQ at 311, 312-13. In
addition, our reviewing court requires the PTO to make
specific findings on a suggestion to combine prior art
references. In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 1000-01, 50
USPQ2d 1614, 1617-19 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
We note that the Appellants have not argued that the
Examiner’s reasons to combine the prior art are in error. In
particular we note that on pages 4 and 5 of the Examiner’s
answer, the Examiner provides specific findings as to the
suggestions to combine the prior art references. In
particular, the Examiner finds that one of ordinary skill
would have been motivated to use a peg-leg low beam because
the extended legs allow for the wires to be mounted further
down the load beam then conventional load beam, thereby
providing more accurate and secure placement of the wires.
The Examiner further finds that one of ordinary skill in the
art would have been further motivated to make the modification
because the reduced thickness of the Hinlein load beam allows
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007