Appeal No. 2002-1119 Application 09/455,064 downwardly along the outside of the window, through the entry space (38), under the bottom edge of the window and ultimately into the interior of the vehicle, where a short hook portion (22) is then positioned to engage a door lock switch or lever (50). The examiner utilizes the Weinraub patent for its teaching of a plastic wedge (col. 5, lines 35-36), urging that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art “to provide the invention of Konopacki/Fenner with the prying tool being made of plastic material” (answer, page 5). Even if we were to accept such a modification of the metal prying tool involved in the examiner’s proposed combination of Konopacki and Fenner, we see nothing in Weinraub which overcomes the above-noted deficiency in the basic combination of the prior art as applied against claim 3 on appeal. Thus, the examiner’s rejection of dependent claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Konopacki, Fenner and Weinraub will not be sustained.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007