Appeal No. 2001-0651
Application 08/134,187
the cavity (aa) with a liquid protective coating as in step c) of
claim 1 on appeal and then hardening the protective coating to
prevent scratching of the imprinted disk.
To address this difference, the examiner turns to Bradshaw,
urging that Bradshaw teaches placing an imprinted disk (23, 25)
into a cavity (17) in the wall (13) of a molded article, and
subsequently filling the cavity with a liquid protective coating
that is then hardened to provide protection of the disk from
damage. In the examiner’s opinion,
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in
the art at the time the invention was made to have provided
in Copley filling each cavity aa with a liquid protective
coating and hardening such to prevent scratching of the disk
because Bradshaw teaches filling a cavity with a liquid
protective coating and hardening such to prevent scratching
of a decorative disk thereunder (answer, page 3).
Appellants argue (brief, pages 6-9) that Bradshaw is not
concerned with metallic tokens, coins or medallions, but instead
is directed to a method of making a ceramic article, and is thus
non-analogous art to the field of appellants’ invention.
Appellants further contend that the examiner is simply picking
and choosing individual steps found scattered among prior art
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007