Appeal No. 1999-1786
Application No. 08/821,738
making a stronger gear which is easier to manufacture.
Appellant argues (brief, page 5) that Fisher does not
indicate that the gear would be stronger or easier to
manufacture and that Scharboneau has no indication that a
stronger gear which is easier to manufacture would be
desirable. We agree with appellant (brief, page 5) that there
is no suggestion in Scharboneau or Fisher to provide the gear
of Scharboneau with a web flange like that taught by Fisher.
The examiner argues (answer, page 6) that although Fisher does
not explicitly state that the gear is strong or easy to
manufacture, one of ordinary skill in the art upon looking at
the disclosures of both Fisher and Scharboneau would have
concluded that the shape and overall design of Fisher’s gear
would inherently be stronger and easier to manufacture than
Scharboneau’s gear. After reviewing the patents to
Scharboneau and Fisher, we agree with appellant (brief, page
5) that the shape and overall design of Fisher’s gear does not
dictate a specific strength or method of manufacturing that
would inherently be stronger and easier to manufacture than
Scharboneau’s gear and that these references provide no
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007