Appeal No. 1999-2665
Application No. 08/826,816
be a rubbery material different from the material of the drum
to absorb shock. Bachi does not teach shock absorbing of any
type, notwithstanding the examiner’s unsupported conclusion
that the material of Bachi’s bobbin “is made of deformable
material and thus the ribs inherently deform at least to some
extent” (answer, page 5). Thus, there is no suggestion in the
combined teachings of the applied references of providing the
tension absorbing means of Sauber as integrally molded one
piece extensions of the core, as called for in each of the
independent claims on appeal. In essence, the examiner’s
rejection is a hindsight reconstruction of appellants’
invention using the disclosure of the present application as a
blueprint.
For these reasons, the examiner’s § 103 rejection of the
appealed claims will not be sustained.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007