Appeal No. 2000-2163 Page 6
Application No. 08/922,521
larger than a predetermined value before the coated electric
wire is press-connected with the pressconnecting terminal,
wherein the heated and softened areas of the coating portion
of the coated electric wire remain on the coated electric wire
as it is forced into the press-connecting terminal. Thus, we
see no motivation in the applied prior art for a person having
ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to have modified the Admitted Prior Art to arrive at the
method of claim 1 or the apparatus of claim 3. At best, the
combined teachings of the applied prior art would have
suggested desheathing the coated electric wire of the Admitted
Prior Art as taught by Keen prior to insertion of the wire
into the press-connecting terminal.
In our view, the only suggestion for modifying the
Admitted Prior Art in the manner proposed by the examiner to
meet the above-noted limitations stems from hindsight
knowledge derived from the appellants' own disclosure. The
use of such hindsight knowledge to support an obviousness
rejection under 35 U.S.C.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007