Appeal No. 2000-0008 Page 5
Application No. 08/842,990
problems with the production of any
specific such dimensions. [final rejection
at page 3].
We do not agree with the examiner. We note that
appellants' specification discloses that the control of the
wall thickness of the hollow stock allows the working degree
and shape of the splines to be controlled. In addition, we
agree with the appellants that there is no motivation to
modify the Bononi method so that the outer diameter is reduced
while the inner diameter is not reduced, as taught by Hotta,
especially in view of the explicit teachings in Bononi that
the hollow stock is worked so that both the inner and outer
diameters are both reduced. In our view, such a modification
amounts to impermissible hindsight reconstruction of the prior
art in order to arrive at the appellants' invention.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007