Appeal No. 2002-0606 Page 4
Application No. 08/989,574
All the claims under appeal are drawn to a fish hook comprising, inter alia,
(1) integral eye, shank, bight, and barb formed of plastic and (2) a member, comprised
of a material having a hardness greater than that of the plastic, running longitudinally
through a portion of the plastic wherein one end of the member extends through the
plastic comprising the barb to form the point of the barb.
The appellant argues (brief, pp. 4-5) that claims 1 to 5, 15 to 17, 20 and 22 are
not anticipated by Nobusato since Nobusato lacks a member which extends through the
plastic comprising the barb (i.e., the member must extend through a plastic barb). We
agree. While Nobusato does disclose a fishhook made of a metal member 1 covered
with plastic 2 (see Figures 1-4), Nobusato does not teach a member extending through
the plastic comprising the barb to form the point of the barb. In that regard, as shown in
Figures 1 and 4 of Nobusato, the metal member 1 does not extend through the plastic
comprising the barb. Likewise, while the metal member 1 does extend through the
plastic to form the barb as shown in Figures 2 and 3 of Nobusato, the metal member 1
does not extend through the plastic comprising the barb.
Since all the limitations of claims 1 to 5, 15 to 17, 20 and 22 are not found, either
expressly described or under principles of inherency, in Nobusato for the reasons set
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007