Appeal No. 2001-2178
Application No. 09/039,466
the desirability of the modification. In re Gordon, 733 F.2d
900, 902, 221 USPQ 1125, 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
Furthermore, although the examiner’s observation that
Hermanson’s loop strap (tape 6' and loop 6) is inherently
capable of being slipped over a door knob is manifestly
reasonable, it is neither dispositive of, nor particularly
relevant to, the issue of whether it would have been obvious
to do so as required by claim 1. In short, the combined
teachings of Hermanson and Froelich do not provide the factual
basis necessary to conclude that it would have been obvious to
modify the manner in which Hermanson’s exercise device is
attached to a door (see Figures 7, 7' and 8) so as to meet the
requirement in claim 1 that the loop strap be slipped over a
knob on the exterior surface of the door. Hence, the
collective disclosures of Hermanson and Froelich do not
warrant a conclusion that the differences between the subject
matter recited in claim 1 and the prior art are such that the
subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time
the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in
the art. Therefore, we shall not sustain the standing 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claim 1, and dependent claims 2
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007