Appeal No. 2001-0730 Page 8
Application No. 09/221,543
the time the invention was made to have associated an internal
wrenching surface (hollow passage) with the bolt shaft of the
Admitted Prior Art. It follows that we cannot sustain the
examiner's rejections of claims 5 to 7 and 12 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103.
REMAND
We remand the application to the examiner for further
consideration of the following issue under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The examiner has set forth the pertinent teachings of Patyna
(answer, p. 4) and has appeared to determine (answer, p. 7)
that Patyna discloses all the subject matter of claim 12
except for the nut. We remand the application to the examiner
to determine whether or not it would have been obvious at the
time the invention was made to a person of ordinary skill in
the art to have used Patyna's hollow bolt with a nut and if
so, to determine if any of the pending claims should be
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
CONCLUSION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007