Appeal No. 1998-1298
Application 08/544,962
Goodman, Moser, Dreffein, and Abraham to effect, according the
examiner’s incentive, a more rigid support, if desired, would
involve the undertaking of a reworking of the aformentioned
conveyors clearly impermissibly based upon hindsight, and not
from any suggestion derived from the applied reference
teachings themselves. It is for these reasons that the
rejection cannot be sustained.
The rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
We do not sustain this rejection for the reason that
follows. Claim 9 depends from independent claim 2, the
rejection of claim 2 having not been sustained, as above. In
the present rejection, the Klein and Foster ‘678 documents are
added to those references earlier applied in the rejection of
claim 2 for reasons which we fully comprehend. Nevertheless,
since these two additional references cannot cure the basic
deficiency of the earlier applied teachings, we likewise
cannot sustain the rejection of dependent claim 9. As a final
point, we simply note that what teachings “could be” applied
is not the dispositive issue under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (examiner’s
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007