Appeal No. 1998-2808
Application No. 08/733,464
F.2d 902, 907, 5 USPQ2d 1788, 1792 (Fed. Cir. 1988). In the
present case, the examiner has not provided a sufficient
factual basis for concluding that the modification to the
screw threads of Feinberg necessary to meet the limitations of
claim 7 would have been obvious. From our perspective, the
examiner has instead impermissibly relied upon the appellants’
own teachings in arriving at a conclusion of obviousness.
This being the case, we will not sustain the rejection of
claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on Feinberg.
Claims 8 through 10, 15 and 16 are dependent on claim 7
and, therefore, contain all of the limitations of that claim.
Therefore, we will also not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. §
103 rejection of claims 8 through 10, 15 and 16.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007