Appeal No. 2002-2210
Application 09/553,295
have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
at the time the invention was made to have operated the
polishing machine at the claimed result set forth in the
claim since it has been held that discovery of optimum value
of result effective variable in known process is ordinary
within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215
(CCPA 1980)
Having reviewed and evaluated the applied Christianson
patent, we share appellant’s assessment of the § 103 rejection
based thereon (brief, pages 12-15) and agree with appellant that
Christianson is solely directed to the polishing of glass
surfaces and neither teaches nor suggests improvements to the
grinding phase of finishing a glass surface or glass workpiece as
addressed by appellant. As for the examiner’s reference to
Christianson col. 20, lines 54-65 for the speeds of the polishing
machine and col. 22, lines 63-67 for the cut rate and Ra values
of the polishing result, we are in total agreement with
appellant’s views expressed on pages 14-15 of the brief and
incorporate them herein as our own.
Since neither the speed nor the cut rate set forth in
independent claims 1, 22 and 56 on appeal for appellant’s
grinding method are disclosed in the cited sections referenced by
the examiner, or anywhere else in the Christianson patent, it is
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007