Appeal No. 2000-0816
Application No. 08/938,875
states that it would have been obvious to use a positive rake
angle on the leading surface of the Suisse tooth for the
purpose of getting a smoother cut as Ohlsson discloses.
In further explaining the rejection, the examiner states
that the Suisse reference does, in fact, disclose a planar
beveled surface that is “generally parallel” with the inclined
angle of the second beveled gullet. The examiner is
apparently of the opinion that “generally” is a term of degree
which broadens the possible angle of the planar surface that
would infringe the subject matter of claim 1. Thus, the
examiner states that Suisse meets the limitation of claim 1
that the beveled planar surface is generally parallel to the
gullet on the trailing edge of the tooth. The examiner then
goes on to state that his posited combination of references
merely needs to change the leading edge of the tooth by the
addition of a positive rake angle.
It is this argument of the examiner that convinces us
that the appellant is correct when he states that the
rejection of claim 1 based on Suisse and Ohlsson is buttressed
on impermissible hindsight. In the examiner’s combination of
references, the examiner is relying on the generally planar
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007