Appeal No. 2001-0089
Application 08/975,469
Hensley patent,4 the declaration of Waldemar Hans, and the
respective
viewpoints of appellants and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determination which follows.
We cannot sustain the rejection of appellants’ claims
under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Initially, we appreciate from a reading of the
specification, as originally filed, that an annular groove is
provided on the circumference of the inlet-side end of a fuel
inlet connecting piece whose radially extending side surfaces
are formed by a plastic sheath surrounding a part of the
valve, the groove base being formed by the circumference of
the fuel inlet connecting piece (pages 1 and 2). The original
4 In our evaluation of the applied Hensley reference, we
have considered all of the disclosure of this document for
what it would have fairly taught one of ordinary skill in the
art. See In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510
(CCPA 1966). Additionally, this panel of the board has taken
into account not only the specific teachings, but also the
inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably have
been expected to draw from the disclosure. See In re Preda,
401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007