Appeal No. 2000-0820 Page 7
Application No. 08/978,625
analysis to determine whether the prior art as combined in the
35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection teaches or suggests the application
of a non-slip grooved surface on every outer surface of a
ratchet wrench, extender and socket as set forth in the claim1
and the other identified differences. We note that the
examiner relies on “White in view of [a]ny of DeVrou, Quinn or
Coviello” (answer, page 3) (emphasis added) to provide the
teaching of “the use of grip enhancing structure on the entire
outer surface of the
assembly” (answer, page 3). Since the examiner has applied
DeVrou, Quinn and Coviello, in the alternative only, in
combination with White, we will analyze each of these
combinations separately.
The test for obviousness is what the combined teachings
of the references would have suggested to one of ordinary
1Both the examiner and appellant are in agreement that the specific
grooved configuration as claimed is well known in the art. Therefore, we will
not include an analysis of these specific limitations.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007