Appeal No. 2000-0652 Page 14
Application No. 08/868,774
After the scope and content of the prior art are
determined, the differences between the prior art and the
claims at issue are to be ascertained. Graham v. John Deere
Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966).
Based on our analysis and review of Balkwill and claim
25, it is our opinion that the only difference is the
limitation that the housing exterior periphery comprises
a projecting abutment for digit engagement, said abutment
comprising an ergonomically curved surface axially
arranged along said housing length for abutting contact
by a first digit of a hand of a user when said housing is
grasped within the hand of the user such that a second
digit of the hand of the user may operate said actuator,
whereby abutting contact of the first digit with said
abutment permits application of a generally axial force
by the first digit on said abutment in a direction
generally opposite to an axial force applied to said
actuator during advancement of said actuator from said
first position to said second position.
In applying the above-noted test for obviousness, we
reach the conclusion that it would have been obvious at the
time the invention was made to a person of ordinary skill in
the art to provide the outer surface of Balkwill's housing 20
with a configuration as taught and suggested by Ben Moura's
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007