Appeal No. 2003-0037
Application 09/924,681
[i.e., the deletion pen], can be replaced with an eraser having
an elastic tip” (column 7, lines 6 through 8).
In proposing to combine Verrier and Takahashi to reject
claim 1 under § 103(a), the examiner concludes that it would have
been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person
having ordinary skill in the art
to substitute an elastic material softer than the
synthetic resin as taught by Takahashi et al. to the
rear input member on the input device as taught by
Verrier because this would help the user to easily
distinguish between writing or erasing based on the
different materials on each tip of the pen [answer,
page 3].
Even if the Verrier reference is assumed to be analogous art
(the appellant argues that it is not), the examiner’s position
here is unsound for at least two reasons.
To begin with, Verrier does not provide any factual basis
for the examiner’s finding that the “front” tip or input member 4
is made of a synthetic resin as required by claim 1. The passage
at lines 1 through 19 of column 9 in the Verrier reference, which
the examiner relies on to support this finding, specifies the
materials from which the bushings 8, 8' and gaskets 6, 6' are
made, but makes no mention of the material from which the tips 4,
4' are made.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007