Appeal No. 1999-2627
Application 08/516,516
of the appealed rejection, the examiner has concluded that it
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to
“modify the locking shaft of McClary by replacing the hollow
hoist tube engaging end with a wedge-shaped insertable end
with a rotational interlock as taught by Heathcoat since, they
are considered to be art-related functional equivalents for
engaging and connecting two shaft members and an obvious
reversal of parts” (final rejection, page 3).
Expedients which are functionally equivalent to one
another, however, are not necessarily obvious in view of one
another.
In re Scott, 323 F.2d 1016, 1019, 139 USPQ 297, 299 (CCPA
1963). The examiner has failed to advance any cogent line of
reasoning or evidence as to why the artisan would have
considered the respective hoist shaft engaging elements on the
McClary and Heathcoat devices to be functional equivalents or
an obvious reversal of parts. Indeed, the structural and
functional differences between the two weigh heavily against
such a proposition. Moreover, although the McClary and
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007