Appeal No. 2001-0308 Page 7
Application No. 09/188,701
tip of either is square. The tip area of the bending arm 11 of
Foshee appears to be rectangular, not square, in Figures 2 and 3
and Sloan depicts only one side of the blade A. Thus, we cannot
reasonably conclude with any certainty that either Sloan or
Foshee discloses a square tip, as required of a "Robertson
driver." It is well established that an anticipation rejection
cannot be predicated on an ambiguous reference. Rather,
disclosures in a reference relied on to prove anticipation must
be so clear and explicit that those skilled in the art will have
no difficulty in ascertaining their meaning. In re Turlay, 304
F.2d 893, 899, 134 USPQ 355, 360 (CCPA 1962).
For the foregoing reasons, we do not share the examiner's
view that any of claims 1-5 is anticipated by Foshee, Sloan or
Frazier and thus we shall not sustain rejections (2) through (4).
The obviousness rejections
The examiner's position in rejecting claims 6-9 as being
unpatentable over Sloan is that it would have been obvious to one
skilled in the art at the time of appellant's invention to
provide a slot having a width as claimed to handle a particular
screw/wire (answer, page 5). Be that as it may, this would still
not transform Sloan's screw driver into a "Robertson driver"
having a square tip, as discussed supra. Therefore, we shall not
sustain rejection (7).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007