Appeal No. 1998-0832
Application 08/496,760
Stolzman 5,160,061 Nov. 3,
1992
The admitted prior art on page 1, line 7, to page 3, line 5
of appellant's specification (APA).
Claims 8 to 12 stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as unpatentable over the APA in view of either Uba or
Stolzman.
Considering first claim 8, the only independent claim on
appeal, the examiner's position in a nutshell is that it would
have been obvious, in view of Uba or Stolzman, to provide the
mounting portion of the shoulder member of the APA with a raised,
plastic rib, and that melting of the rib when the sleeve member
and shoulder member of the APA are joined would necessarily fill
the void between the sleeve member and shoulder member (answer,
pages 4 and 5).
Appellant argues that the APA could be combined with Uba or
Stolzman only with hindsight because the combination would not
solve the problem with which appellant was concerned. This
argument is not well taken, because “[a]s long as some motivation
or suggestion to combine the references is provided by the prior
art taken as a whole, the law does not require that the
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007