Appeal No. 2002-0352
Application 09/374,205
in Gilbert and indicates that his invention is inexpensive to
manufacture and simple to use. In column 5, lines 15-57,
Gringer describes the structure of his utility knife and
operation of the locking mechanism therein and expressly notes
that the locking mechanism of his invention “may be opened
without the difficult movement of the upper and lower housings
required in prior art locking mechanisms, such as that shown
in U.S. Pat. No. 5,121,544 [Gilbert].” Thus, we share
appellant’s view that one of ordinary skill in the art would
(1) have perceived Gringer as an alternative arrangement to
that in Gilbert, (2) have found no motivation for a
combination of these patents like that urged by
the examiner, and (3) have generally concluded that Gringer
teaches away from a combination such as that proposed by the
examiner.
Since we have determined that the teachings and
suggestions found in Gilbert and Gringer would not have made
the subject matter as a whole of claim 1 on appeal obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of appellant’s
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007